So What's The Answer?

[Weasels]

I don't think it will stop as long as dogs exist.

You can't take the risk out of life. We have taken predators into our homes and communities because we (as a species) have decided the benefits outweigh the risks. But those risks still exist, like Rebanne said any dog can bite, just like any human could turn around and stab you. There are a million different reasons for an attack, macho idiots owners is only one. And although we may have opinions on who shouldn't own a dog, or drive a car, or have kids, realistically these people are always going to be out there doing all those things and not the slightest bit interested in changing.

[korbin13]

Haven't they had some success in Calgary? With a combination of education and increasing fines?

As has been said, you are never going to eliminate dog bites. Especially as the majority of bites/attacks come from the family dog or a friends dog, and the majority of victims are children.

Would be good though, if when an incident occurs that the authorities investigate the circumstances thoroughly. Could bring up patterns we aren't seeing.

[RuralPug]

You will never eliminate the risk entirely, but changing social mores by (1) education (2) deterents such as fines/removing the dog(s) of a serial offending owner/legally preventing them from owning another pet and (3) social meme to make the practice of irresponsible dog ownership offensive to the community will minimise the risk as much as possible.

The recent campaign in several states against "hoon" driving which combined all the above, has to my eyes, made a marked difference. Compared to even five years ago more community members are ready to report "hoon" driving, fewer young people are ready to take the risk given the much heavier and sometimes immediate penalties and best of all the risk takers are much much less likely to gain the admiration of their peers for hoon activities.

Sure, there will probably always be a hard-core in each generation that will "hoon" dangerously, and yes there will always be a hard-core of individuals who want aggressive dogs to cover up their own insecurities, but hopefully by changing the social mores with a concerted campaign and punitive genuine legislation (that punishes the owner for not properly socialising/containing their dogs, not the dogs themselves) then community views will gradually swing to put the blame on the owners, not the dogs.

Therefore average Joe Blow will become a responsible dog owner.

It won't happen overnight. No law could make that happen overnight. But throw enough intelligence and enough resources at the problem and 5 or 10 years could make our streets a safer place for us and our pets. And for my next pipe dream....

Edited June 3, 2012 by RuralPug

[Kirislin]

I really want to believe that it's possible to make it safer with education and tougher penalties, but I just cant. There are so many large breeds around now that aren't suitable for just anyone and yet anyone can own them, breed them, and sell them as they want, take the Cane Corso advertised on gumtree for example.

But imagine if the government then said we all had to pass a test assessed by "experts" and get a licence of dog handling competency before we could own a dog. Can you imagine the uproar and indignation, and god help us if we failed and had our dogs taken off us.

I dont know what the answer is, but I often feel unsafe now when I walk my dogs at the park.

[WreckitWhippet]

Dogs attacks are always going to happen, as you you dealing with a living creature with the ability to think for itself. They are expected to fit in to our society, often with little or no socialisation, exercise, companionship and mental stimulation.

You can't educate those who don't want to know and there's not the resourses in place to reach those who would possibly would like to know more. Education I believe would reduce the number of attacks in the home/yard, however I'm not sure that there are owners out there that are willing to committ to providing everything their dog needs in terms of basic manners, exercise and companionship.

As for random attacks in the street, I think that many are not so random but are a result of dogs that are frequently out of their yards and members of the public/neighbours have failed to do anything about it.

I know from personal expereince the dog attacks on my dogs have been by neighbourhood dogs that roam or the owners do not have adequate fencing.

I don't believe in lumping new laws on top of existing one's that aren't policed. If you want to make a difference and prevent an attack in the street, then get your local council off it's arse and start reporting the dogs you see roamingand make sure it's followed up.

I'm sure everyone has a relative that keeps a dog in such conditions, that it's an accident waiting to happen and education starts at home.

As for dog aggressive dogs, there are always going to be those too. A dog aggressive dog is not an issue, I have several, it's part of the territory when you own Terriers and unless I cock up, there's no chance of them causing problems in the wider community.

Edited June 3, 2012 by Pav Lova

[raineth]

It would be nice to see the government step in and do a safety campaign like they do with drink driving and drugs but with dogs...

How to stuff like in shmoos post #3

Wouldn't it be nice if all dog owners had to attend a minimum intro training class..

But even with all the campaigns we still have drunk drivers killing people, we still have a massive drug problem.

If people dont want BSL to fully come into force then they need to come up with something better than just saying we need to educate. I'm sorry but it wont be enough.

I have to agree with kirislin. I think we have a tendency in our society to see education as a panacea for everything, however there really is a limit to what it can achieve.

From personal experience I would think that there is less dog bites now than when I was a kid and there were many, many more roaming dogs. These dogs had a tendency to defend their territory against anyone coming in. I remember as a kid having whole streets we would avoid whole streets because of dogs that would be roaming there. So I would think the introduction of leash laws have had a good effect on reducing the number of dog bites and attacks. And I guess more could still be done to reduce this.

I think reducing the quantity of dog bites that occur within someone's property would be a lot harder.

[Leema]

Education.

Teach...

• ...animals and people the warning signs of an uncomfortable dog.
  
• ...children not to touch unknown dogs without permission.
  
• ...children not to approach strange dogs, not to approach dogs with food or sleeping.
  
• ...children not to torment dogs
  
• ...dog owners to socialise their dogs well and safely.
  

Yes yes yes.

I normally say there are 4 facets of dog bite prevention education:

*Educate adults (especially parents) on how to read potentially dangerous dog body language.

*Educate children on how to act around dogs to prevent dog bites.

*Educate dog owners to socialise and train their dogs to be confident, stable, unbitey dogs.

*Educate dog breeders to not breed from aggressive dogs.

Though few dog bites occur with dogs roaming at large, there should be better council prevention of this occurrence. Right now it's reactive: We need some 'contain your dog' campaigns, that have been shown to be effective in reducing roaming dogs in other countries.

[Dame Aussie]

Sorry, but it'd be easier to push diarrhoea uphill with a fork.

Sadly, I don't think it's going to get any better. I think worse is more likely.

I agree with this.

If we can't even stop humans from attacking one another, how can we expect them to control their dogs too?

As was said earlier, you can't cure stupid.

No matter how much we educate there will always be people who don't care.

Best thing to do is punish the owners, not the dogs.

[m-sass]

I'm fine but it's something I've wondered about alot, there's always posts here about close calls or attacks, so many people have dog aggressive dogs, I dont believe education will work, it's impossible to get the message through to the entire population of dog owners, and there's some who just dont agree anyway, they WANT savage dogs. It depresses me. I often think of Ayen Chol, an innocent child sitting in her own home killed by a dog someone thinks they have a right to own and there's no law to stop them. If BSL isn't the answer what is?

I'm not saying I agree with BSL.

The idea of BSL is to eliminate the types of dogs who killed poor little Ayen so when the owners do drop the ball they don't own the type of dog that will go on a killing spree with uncontrollable aggression. There is a good reason why the types of dogs, Pitbull's, Mastiff's etc and cross breeds of these types of dogs are not used by professionals in protection and guarding, there is a reason professionals use GSD's Rottweiler's, Belgian Shepherd's because they have the stability, intelligence and trainability to be a safer option in the community........I am not against people owning dogs for a protective purpose, but they need to get a proper one bred with the stability for that type of role, not the progeny of uncontrollable landsharks from a BYB offered for sale in the Trading Post, crap dogs like this are accidents waiting to happen and ultimately the death of other animals and sadly people/kids.

Edited June 4, 2012 by m-sass

[korbin13]

I'm fine but it's something I've wondered about alot, there's always posts here about close calls or attacks, so many people have dog aggressive dogs, I dont believe education will work, it's impossible to get the message through to the entire population of dog owners, and there's some who just dont agree anyway, they WANT savage dogs. It depresses me. I often think of Ayen Chol, an innocent child sitting in her own home killed by a dog someone thinks they have a right to own and there's no law to stop them. If BSL isn't the answer what is?

I'm not saying I agree with BSL.

The idea of BSL is to eliminate the types of dogs who killed poor little Ayen so when the owners do drop the ball they don't own the type of dog that will go on a killing spree with uncontrollable aggression. There is a good reason why the types of dogs, Pitbull's, Mastiff's etc and cross breeds of these types of dogs are not used by professionals in protection and guarding, there is a reason professionals use GSD's Rottweiler's, Belgian Shepherd's because they have the stability, intelligence and trainability to be a safer option in the community........I am not against people owning dogs for a protective purpose, but they need to get a proper one bred with the stability for that type of role, not the progeny of uncontrollable landsharks from a BYB offered for sale in the Trading Post, crap dogs like this are accidents waiting to happen and ultimately the death of other animals and sadly people/kids.

The last person killed in WA by dog attack was an elderly woman mauled to death by a couple of neighbours Rottweilers that were roaming.

[m-sass]

Any breed of dog taught violent actions from a young age will have it in-ground in them and the chances of ever removing those lessons would be pretty slim. Pity we couldn't take whatever choice of training device they use on the dogs to become aggressive and use it on the owners instead.

I disagree with this mentality, aggression is in the dog's make up even when tormented and abused to become defensive most dogs will shut down with the default to flee, the dogs that do come through this type of treatment with aggression have an aggressive temperament and the disposition to fight and not all dogs can be made voilent with this treatment unless they have a defensive trait.

[dee lee]

how can dog attacks (to people and other animals) be stopped from happening in the first place.

It's not good enough to punish the owners and or dogs once the damage is done, it should never happen in the first place.

No, but harsher punishment will make many think twice about their responsibilities as dog owners.

Too many idiots get off with a slap on the wrist, don't/can't/wont contain/control their dogs. Too many victims don't bother to complain because they feel nothing will come of it. I think there needs to be a consequence to make a difference.

I don't support BSL, but I do support harsher fines and consequences for serial and serious offenders - the owners, not the dogs.

Absolutely!

Give councils greater power to fine those who do not follow the law & keep their dogs contained. Zero tolerance, none of this warning business.

I had a depressing experience last year with a dickhead who feels he is entitled to let his DA dog roam outside his place of business.

2 unprovoked attacks on my dog (no damage thank god), countless reports and warnings & fines only after I nagged council non stop for months, were they able to slap him with a 6 month nuisance notice. Now if they see the dog offlead he gets a much larger fine & they can pursue him in court. The 6 months is up. I'm betting the dog is offlead again, but I'm not keen to check it out.

The guy has tried to intimidate me & has campaigned against me with passing locals (more fool him, most of them are parents at my kids school! ). He has even told council he should be given an exception and that the dogs need to "sort it out"! All so he can let his dog wander while he works.

How can we believe there will be any hope of no dog attacks when people like this will not comply & simply don't care?

[m-sass]

I'm fine but it's something I've wondered about alot, there's always posts here about close calls or attacks, so many people have dog aggressive dogs, I dont believe education will work, it's impossible to get the message through to the entire population of dog owners, and there's some who just dont agree anyway, they WANT savage dogs. It depresses me. I often think of Ayen Chol, an innocent child sitting in her own home killed by a dog someone thinks they have a right to own and there's no law to stop them. If BSL isn't the answer what is?

I'm not saying I agree with BSL.

The idea of BSL is to eliminate the types of dogs who killed poor little Ayen so when the owners do drop the ball they don't own the type of dog that will go on a killing spree with uncontrollable aggression. There is a good reason why the types of dogs, Pitbull's, Mastiff's etc and cross breeds of these types of dogs are not used by professionals in protection and guarding, there is a reason professionals use GSD's Rottweiler's, Belgian Shepherd's because they have the stability, intelligence and trainability to be a safer option in the community........I am not against people owning dogs for a protective purpose, but they need to get a proper one bred with the stability for that type of role, not the progeny of uncontrollable landsharks from a BYB offered for sale in the Trading Post, crap dogs like this are accidents waiting to happen and ultimately the death of other animals and sadly people/kids.

The last person killed in WA by dog attack was an elderly woman mauled to death by a couple of neighbours Rottweilers that were roaming.

Were the Rottweilers papered dogs bred by an experienced Rottweiler breeder who breeds to type or were they BYB's or perhaps crossbreeds??

[Dame Aussie]

I'm fine but it's something I've wondered about alot, there's always posts here about close calls or attacks, so many people have dog aggressive dogs, I dont believe education will work, it's impossible to get the message through to the entire population of dog owners, and there's some who just dont agree anyway, they WANT savage dogs. It depresses me. I often think of Ayen Chol, an innocent child sitting in her own home killed by a dog someone thinks they have a right to own and there's no law to stop them. If BSL isn't the answer what is?

I'm not saying I agree with BSL.

The idea of BSL is to eliminate the types of dogs who killed poor little Ayen so when the owners do drop the ball they don't own the type of dog that will go on a killing spree with uncontrollable aggression. There is a good reason why the types of dogs, Pitbull's, Mastiff's etc and cross breeds of these types of dogs are not used by professionals in protection and guarding, there is a reason professionals use GSD's Rottweiler's, Belgian Shepherd's because they have the stability, intelligence and trainability to be a safer option in the community........I am not against people owning dogs for a protective purpose, but they need to get a proper one bred with the stability for that type of role, not the progeny of uncontrollable landsharks from a BYB offered for sale in the Trading Post, crap dogs like this are accidents waiting to happen and ultimately the death of other animals and sadly people/kids.

The last person killed in WA by dog attack was an elderly woman mauled to death by a couple of neighbours Rottweilers that were roaming.

Were the Rottweilers papered dogs bred by an experienced Rottweiler breeder who breeds to type or were they BYB's or perhaps crossbreeds??

You do know that a well bred dog also has the capacity to bite too don't you?

There is no guarantee with any type of dog, well bred or not.

Oh and not all cross bred dogs are "crap". My beautiful rescue boy is not "crap".

[Mrs Rusty Bucket]

This is like asking - how can we stop car accidents happening, they shouldn't happen. We can do things to reduce the chances but every now and again - someone just isn't with it or doesn't see the other car (in the same way you don't see the black around motion picture film frames).

It's also like asking - how can we stop bugs in computer programs...

Attacks by dogs allowed to roam the streets unsupervised, those should be prevented. But attacks on teasing children, or people told not to poke their fingers in the crate - they're harder to stop.

[Flow Won Smai]

Perhaps, a government push for the registration of all dogs. And actually policing unregistered pets.

Criteria for the registration of a dog, such as a dog owners licence that can only be obtained after completing a responsible ownership course.

It's drastic measures, but if put in place, im sure it would greatly reduce dog related incidences.

[Dogsfevr]

Most people can't follow offleash etiquette & believe there friendly dog can do as it pleases so you aren't going to stop the other factor either.

Plenty on DOL have posted about things they break the law about or believe it doesn't apply to them & they get educated but don't care.

Then you have the band wagon brigade who support any new trend when they don't have a clue

[Sheridan]

The last person killed in WA by dog attack was an elderly woman mauled to death by a couple of neighbours Rottweilers that were roaming.

Were the Rottweilers papered dogs bred by an experienced Rottweiler breeder who breeds to type or were they BYB's or perhaps crossbreeds??

Not sure what difference this would make?

[Guest lavendergirl]

There are no simple answers. Irresponsibility in dog ownership reflects the overall deterioration of personal responsibility in all aspects of modern day life. People who buy unsuitable dogs on a whim, don't look after them, let them run amok etc are the same people who are irresponsible in other areas of their life as well. Small steps may help though such as the education of children in appropriate behaviour around dogs - though I hesitate to say this should be done in schools they have enough on their plate. Educational segments on television and other media would also help particularly on children's and vet type shows. Brochures provided with the purchase and/or registration of puppies, free educational talks at pet expos etc.

[Dame Aussie]

The last person killed in WA by dog attack was an elderly woman mauled to death by a couple of neighbours Rottweilers that were roaming.

Were the Rottweilers papered dogs bred by an experienced Rottweiler breeder who breeds to type or were they BYB's or perhaps crossbreeds??

Not sure what difference this would make?

From their posts it seems m-sass believes that as long as a dog is a purebred, bred by a responsible breeder there is no chance it could attack. Only cross bred, BYB "landsharks" do that.