Dogs In Front Yards

[megan_]

you're spot on!

[mixeduppup]

50kg pitbulls? Someone has been eating too many children. :D

[tdierikx]

My Lab beats up my Pittie... can someone tell her that she's supposed to be this big vicious killer please? *grin*

My Pittie loves kids and all new friends - I think she missed the memo about eating them...

T.

[Luke GSP]

So if there is a pack of pitbulls behind a 1ft fence Luke GSP, they rush you and your dog but if they don't cross the fence line then it's all roses?

If they couldn't get past the fence then it was obviously adequate! Adequately contained to me is that they were being obstructed from reaching someone. If they Rushed me but didn't/couldn't get past the fence they were adequately contained.

To some people, the only adequate containment of a pack of pitbulls is to have they locked in pens in peoples gardens, is that all roses? See that is what happens when you try to pander to OPINION rather than facts.

you see at the end of the day peoples definition of adequate when assessing a situation is directly linked to their level of fear or anxiety not whether the fence/containment is actually doing it's job, which lets face it, if all these raging monsters were behind inadequate fencing, they would have got past it and attacked wouldn't they? because if it was not adequate, then they would have been able to get to the person on the other side and attack, but that did not happen, so one of three things occurred

1, the containment was adequate

2, the dog didn't want to attack (or else it would have once past the inadequate fence)

3, the persons fear or anxiety is affecting their assesment

[Luke GSP]

the fence just didn't seem adequate and I was a bit scared. But technically they're not doing anything wrong

BINGO

[megan_]

In the pack of pitbulls scenario, the training would have stopped them from breaching the fence line, not the physical fence. By your standard, the dog needs to have gotten out in order for the fencing to be deemed inadequate - too late for the poor person who bears the consequence of this (dogs often behave differently on their own territory when the owner isn't there).

I was rushed by a staffy cross who slept out of the front of a house with 2 ft fence and no gate. The dog never crossed the boundary but I wasn't waiting around to find that out and ran into the road with my two dogs. Adequate?

[Luke GSP]

So if there is a pack of pitbulls behind a 1ft fence Luke GSP, they rush you and your dog but if they don't cross the fence line then it's all roses?

Just like the dogs that bailes you up in the street while the owner in down the road carrying a leash;he tells you it's ok they are under effective voice control.

Nope nothing like that, they did not get past the containment hence they were contained FACT

[melzawelza]

the fence just didn't seem adequate and I was a bit scared. But technically they're not doing anything wrong

BINGO

You've already been shown that in many cases they WOULD be doing something wrong, yet you still say 'bingo'?

It is up to the Council to decide if the fence is adequate or not. If you report it, they aren't forced to act. If the person is being over the top then once Council has gone and checked out the fence they won't take any action. If the fence is inadequate they will. That's what Councils and ACO's are for.

[Greytmate]

Fences change over time, especially when a fifty-kilo child muncher is slamming its body against it. You do not have to be an engineer to predict that a fence may be likely to fail sometime soon.

Fear may be an influence in that assessment, as it should be. It's quite a rational fear, and it is normal to feel anxious if a dog with a mouth as big as your head is having a go at you.

A high, properly installed chain-link fence (or pen) is appropriate for big strong breeds that may behave aggressively towards things on the other side of the fence.

[Jetpoint GSP]

I agree that the large breeds always get 'picked on' I've only ever been chased, bitten or harrassed by small white fluffy's and the yapping...omg. But if a big dog in a yard barks - well lets call the police and have them reported.

[melzawelza]

I agree that the large breeds always get 'picked on' I've only ever been chased, bitten or harrassed by small white fluffy's and the yapping...omg. But if a big dog in a yard barks - well lets call the police and have them reported.

I'd just as likely report a SWF if it was 2/3 of the way through the gaps in the fence too. They just aren't as relevant to the discussion as they are much easier to contain.

[Rebanne]

I'd just as likely report a SWF if it was 2/3 of the way through the gaps in the fence too. They just aren't as relevant to the discussion as they are much easier to contain.

but cause they are smaller and their owners don't think they are a problem they are often not contained properly.

[melzawelza]

I'd just as likely report a SWF if it was 2/3 of the way through the gaps in the fence too. They just aren't as relevant to the discussion as they are much easier to contain.

but cause they are smaller and their owners don't think they are a problem they are often not contained properly.

This is true.

[Luke GSP]

A dog can only be proved to be "inadequately contained" IF it actually gets out.

All those that feel that just because a fence holds back the viscous beast this time, means that it is adequately contained, I am afraid that you are wrong, you and I might not have the ability, but there are some on this forum that despite not being structural engineers or having any other link to the building, fencing or construction industry, can tell at a glance whilst hurrying past with their dog, that a fence/method of containment is "not adequate" Maybe if the councils weren't busy with all these "potential" dangerous dogs, based on no more evidence than someones "opinion" they could get on with dealing with actual problems?

Maybe people should try and sort out their own insecurities and fears before appointing themselves judge and jury on the rest of society should they not conform to their views of what is adequate or acceptable? IF THE ANIMAL DID NOT GET OUT, THEN THE CONTAINMENT WAS ADEQUATE!

Just because something frightens YOU does not make it unsafe or dangerous. If it did then every theme park the world over would be closed overnight.

I find it both hilarious and perplexing that the person that has been screaming constantly in multiple threads in the last few days that owners of large, powerful breeds must take extra safety precautions to ensure their dogs are never placed in a position where they are able to injure another dog or person, is now making comments like these.

In the two scenarios I have described, do you feel that the containment of the dog was adequate? Both situations are true scenarios:

1. Large 50+kg (actual 50+ this time, not mythical) powerful breed dog behind chicken wire that is actually bending the wire while it is lunging and going off it's tree. Dog is clearly physically trying to get through the fence as opposed to just barking at it (and btw same dog chased down mine and attacked completely unprovoked a few months later while no where near it's property). And before you say 'but it didn't get through), the dog's stimulus was my dog, so by me bolting as fast as I can I removed the stimulus and the dog stopped trying to get through. If I'd been there for a while there's every chance it would have.

2. Large ~35-40kg powerful breed kept in an unfenced yard. The yard is raised approx 1.5 metres off the ground - dog can easily jump down but hasn't yet (Still young, not reached social maturity yet). Goes bananas at anyone going past. It at or above head height for people walking past.

I'll also link you to NSW Local Gov't Act Section 124 (7):

Orders requiring or prohibiting the doing of things to or on premises

To do what?: To fence land

In what circumstances?: Public health, safety or convenience renders it necessary or expedient to do so and there is no adequate fence between the land and a public place

To whom?: Owner or occupier of land

source

This can absolutely be used in the case of 2 (and I did use it, and they now have an adequate fence), and in the case of number 1, the individual Council would decide what constitutes 'adequate'. I would say the fence is not adequate and place the order if the owner did not modify it willingly (Not my case, but they did do so willingly).

ETA: I'll also add that in states other than NSW where individual Councils can introduce bylaws, most will have bylaws clearly stating what is considered 'adequate' fencing for the size of dog it is containing and will take action if it does not meet that critera, regardless of whether the dog has escaped.

Oh you do make me laugh

Scenario 1, the fence bent, it did not fall over and hence the dog could not get through, which would mean.........wait for it.... it was contained. FACT! The reason you pre-empted that in your statement before is because it is the answer based on fact. If we based it on your thought that there was "Every chance" it could get through, that would be basing it on perception, fear, anxiety, hysteria and hyperbole.

Scenario 2, There is no form of containment from what you are describing, hence how could it be deemed as adequate?

link as many sites as you like, if a local government has a ruling as to what they require, then you have to comply regardless of what dog you have, (I would have thought that was obvious, but I see that I will have to take this slowly) If there is no ruling or bylaw, then it is still the owners responsibility to keep the dog contained. I would have thought that someone as opposed to trying to make one solution fit all BSL/APBT's would understand that different dogs would require different levels of fencing to "contain them"

Here is some definitions for you

Adequate

1. Sufficient to satisfy a requirement or meet a need. See Synonyms at sufficient.

Contain

1.

a. To have within; hold.

b. To be capable of holding.

2. To have as component parts; include or comprise: The album contains many memorable songs.

3.

a. To hold or keep within limits; restrain: I could hardly contain my curiosity.

b. To halt the spread or development of; check: Science sought an effective method of containing the disease.

4. To check the expansion or influence of (a hostile power or ideology) by containment.

5. Mathematics To be exactly divisible by.

So using that consider Scenario 1 and consider, did it "Meet the need" of keeping the dog "within its limits?" if it did, then it was adequately contained by pure definition, unless of course there is a regulatory requirement locally (as detailed above)

As you said above, in previous threads I have screaming constantly in multiple threads in the last few days that owners of large, powerful breeds must take extra safety precautions to ensure their dogs are never placed in a position where they are able to injure another dog or person.

So if the dog is adequately contained within a fence, how is it able to injure another dog or person? Does it have a projectile of some sort

[rebelsquest]

Oh you do make me laugh

Scenario 1, the fence bent, it did not fall over and hence the dog could not get through, which would mean.........wait for it.... it was contained. FACT! The reason you pre-empted that in your statement before is because it is the answer based on fact. If we based it on your thought that there was "Every chance" it could get through, that would be basing it on perception, fear, anxiety, hysteria and hyperbole.

Or on common sense and an understanding of the laws of physics.

[Luke GSP]

So if there is a pack of pitbulls behind a 1ft fence Luke GSP, they rush you and your dog but if they don't cross the fence line then it's all roses?

Why is it always the "pitbulls" or larger breed types that get such a bagging in these sort of threads?

Seriously - if there were one or more swfs in an inadequately fenced yard threatening to get out and do me or my dogs harm, I'd be just as narked off as if the dogs were of a larger breed.

Funnily enough, around our way, it's more likely that it will be the swfs that will have a go... not the larger breeds...

... and don't give me that malarkey about smaller dogs doing less damage so it's more acceptable for them to be nasty... it's not!

T.

I think Megan was saying that because Luke GSP has been on a rampage in quite a few threads recently about 'pitbulls' (50kg ones apparently) initially and then all large breed owners needing to take many more precautions than other dog owners because their dogs are more powerful (which I actually didn't disagree with at all, once he wasn't only singling out 'pit bulls' and was addressing ALL large dogs).

I think Megan, like me, picked up that that seemed to be in direct contradiction to his posts in this thread. Correct me if I'm wrong Megan.

Edited for clarity.

Oh how very boring

1, I singled out APBT's in regard to "gameness" as explained to you repeatedly (yet you continue to chuck it at me as if I mentioned no other type in an attempt to discredit my opinion)

2, No contradiction at all mate as you said yourself, and I quote (because I love your use of emotional language to try and hype things up :laugh: ) i have been screaming constantly in multiple threads in the last few days that owners of large, powerful breeds must take extra safety precautions to ensure their dogs are never placed in a position where they are able to injure another dog or person. If a fence is able to adequately contain an animal how is it able to injure another dog or person?

what you need to keep in mind is that no matter how many times you repeat an incorrect statement or accusation it still doesn't make it true. Sorry for putting facts in to your post, I know, they ruin a good story.

[tdierikx]

I'd just as likely report a SWF if it was 2/3 of the way through the gaps in the fence too. They just aren't as relevant to the discussion as they are much easier to contain.

but cause they are smaller and their owners don't think they are a problem they are often not contained properly.

... and they can fit through much smaller gaps than the bigger breeds... *grin*

T.

[Luke GSP]

Oh you do make me laugh

Scenario 1, the fence bent, it did not fall over and hence the dog could not get through, which would mean.........wait for it.... it was contained. FACT! The reason you pre-empted that in your statement before is because it is the answer based on fact. If we based it on your thought that there was "Every chance" it could get through, that would be basing it on perception, fear, anxiety, hysteria and hyperbole.

Or on common sense and an understanding of the laws of physics.

"Common sense" is not that common or else we would not need OHS and the multitude of other legislations that have been introduced to try and protect idiots from themselves.

laws of physics, now there is a black and white measure. So based on the laws of physics if an object or entity cannot from one space to another because it is surrounded on all sides by a barrier that it is unable to pass through or around, is it contained within that barrier? Go on, answer it using the laws of physics

[melzawelza]

Aahhahahaha, so even legislation is not enough for Luke GSP to admit he's wrong. But then he still hasn't even admitted that no pure bred APBT is 50kg so why am I not surprised.

Edited November 9, 2012 by melzawelza

[BlaznHotAussies]

I always feel bad walking past... Being an eldest child has subjected me to "be quiet, the baby's asleep!!!" for most of my life (four younger siblings) so I always worry when there's a dog barking that someone's baby is going to be woken up or the poor mother who's trying to have an afternoon sleep!!

Or it just plain scares the crap out of me, especially when it sounds like it's behind me because I always instantly assume it's out of it's yard

Let alone my dog...I practically have to drag him past barking dogs...he has no balls, literally.