Family Pet Mauled To Death

[doggleworth]

Reading some of the stupid comments in this thread seems to really show how bsl & dangerous dog legislation has come into being-when you have morons trying to justify dogs killing other dogs and setting up a clear delineation between large dogs and "little yappers" all you are doing is giving councils and governments more reasons to try to discourage people from owning large dog breeds.

If your dog can't be trusted either muzzle it, or keep it away from other dogs regardless of the breed. If your large dog is going to kill a small dog if it gets into a spat with it then it is up to you as a responsible dog owner to take reasonable steps to stop your dog doing that.

[mantis]

I've had my large dogs aggressively rushed by small dogs many times... but it's still MY responsibility to make sure that MY dogs don't react to the "threat" in a negative manner...

Everyone is responsible for their OWN dogs' behaviour in public... and no-one should expect to be rushed or attacked by ANY dog. BUT, if you own a dog that could do lethal damage and is likely to react badly in public, then please either keep the dog at home, get a qualified behaviourist/trainer, and only ever take the dog to places where it won't be stimulated to react badly.

It is NOT your "right" to exercise a reactive dog in a public space where it could do something unexpected and either injure or kill another dog - provoked or otherwise.

T.

If all owners of dogs either big dogs or small, followed the law & never let their dogs off leash, except in off leash areas, there wouldn't be a problem. Also, why should people with FA dogs have to keep their dogs prisoners, because of irresponsible owners? You do realise that dogs become FA, after being attacked by off leash dogs, while they were on lead aren't you?

Honestly, it just annoys me that people think that because big dogs can cause more damage, they are the only ones who should follow the law.

I do agree with the OP, the dogs in this case are definitely in the wrong & I feel sorry for the poor dog & the owners.

What exactly is your problem Mantis? You either have a FA or DA dog in a public area?

Surely as a responsible owner you would either; avoid setting the dog up for failure in the first place; or as an owner who KNOWS your dog is either FA or DA you make SURE your dog is not forced into a position to fail.

ETA Spelling.

Your reply is my problem, if I as a responsible owner walks my dog on lead & doesn't go to off lead areas, I should be able to walk my dog without fear of it being attacked.

Because of the attitude of some people on here & moron dog owners in the community, I am to scared to walk my new dog Cougar, in case she ends up like my poor Kenny.

It's total bull****, keep your dogs on lead if you don't want them hurt & to stop them hurting other dogs, big or small, how hard is that?

A fully expected reply and a really crap response.

As is yours.

[Greytmate]

Reading some of the stupid comments in this thread seems to really show how bsl & dangerous dog legislation has come into being-when you have morons trying to justify dogs killing other dogs and setting up a clear delineation between large dogs and "little yappers" all you are doing is giving councils and governments more reasons to try to discourage people from owning large dog breeds.

If your dog can't be trusted either muzzle it, or keep it away from other dogs regardless of the breed. If your large dog is going to kill a small dog if it gets into a spat with it then it is up to you as a responsible dog owner to take reasonable steps to stop your dog doing that.

Yes, good post.

People should know if they have a dog that plays well with others or if they have reactive or intolerant one. I have a reactive one, he is always muzzled and on lead, and so he can't injure little dogs even if they do rush out unexpectedly or yap annoyingly.

[tdierikx]

Please read my posting in context before jumping to conclusions about it's meaning...

I've had my large dogs aggressively rushed by small dogs many times... but it's still MY responsibility to make sure that MY dogs don't react to the "threat" in a negative manner...

Everyone is responsible for their OWN dogs' behaviour in public... and no-one should expect to be rushed or attacked by ANY dog. BUT, if you own a dog that could do lethal damage and is likely to react badly in public, then please either keep the dog at home, get a qualified behaviourist/trainer, and only ever take the dog to places where it won't be stimulated to react badly.

It is NOT your "right" to exercise a reactive dog in a public space where it could do something unexpected and either injure or kill another dog - provoked or otherwise.

Taking the keep your dog at home part completely out of context and bemoaning how that impacts on you and your FA dog doesn't do you or your dog any favours... what are you doing with Cougar to ensure that she doesn't have the negative experience(s) that your previous dog had?

T.

[_PL_]

This is the saddest story and the saddest decline into big vs small debate thanks to a few irrationally gobbing off then back-peddling.

Quit banging on with excuses, common denominator is owners with no idea or in complete denial about what their dog is like in public.

Believe the big vs small, innocent large vs feral yapper if you like but it's all just = winner vs loser every time.

Rest in peace little one. I'm so so sorry. :rainbowbridge:

[Santo66]

I've had my large dogs aggressively rushed by small dogs many times... but it's still MY responsibility to make sure that MY dogs don't react to the "threat" in a negative manner...

Everyone is responsible for their OWN dogs' behaviour in public... and no-one should expect to be rushed or attacked by ANY dog. BUT, if you own a dog that could do lethal damage and is likely to react badly in public, then please either keep the dog at home, get a qualified behaviourist/trainer, and only ever take the dog to places where it won't be stimulated to react badly.

It is NOT your "right" to exercise a reactive dog in a public space where it could do something unexpected and either injure or kill another dog - provoked or otherwise.

You are not responsible for your dog's actions if rushed at by an off leash dog and yours in on leash in a public place. The person at fault is the one who allowed their dog to be at large and do the rushing and the consequences are irrelevent. You don't have to muzzle reactive dogs or keep reactive dogs away from public places where there may be dogs at large rushing at leashed dogs. It's up to the owners of all dogs to keep them on leash in a public place and not allow them to rush at other dogs and respect the personal space of others.

[melzawelza]

I've had my large dogs aggressively rushed by small dogs many times... but it's still MY responsibility to make sure that MY dogs don't react to the "threat" in a negative manner...

Everyone is responsible for their OWN dogs' behaviour in public... and no-one should expect to be rushed or attacked by ANY dog. BUT, if you own a dog that could do lethal damage and is likely to react badly in public, then please either keep the dog at home, get a qualified behaviourist/trainer, and only ever take the dog to places where it won't be stimulated to react badly.

It is NOT your "right" to exercise a reactive dog in a public space where it could do something unexpected and either injure or kill another dog - provoked or otherwise.

You are not responsible for your dog's actions if rushed at by an off leash dog and yours in on leash in a public place. The person at fault is the one who allowed their dog to be at large and do the rushing and the consequences are irrelevent. You don't have to muzzle reactive dogs or keep reactive dogs away from public places where there may be dogs at large rushing at leashed dogs. It's up to the owners of all dogs to keep them on leash in a public place and not allow them to rush at other dogs and respect the personal space of others.

In NSW, this is correct to a degree, as there is a defense of provocation. However a dog can be declared dangerous for 'displaying unreasonable aggression'. That is of course subjective but if a dog rushes your leashed dog and your dog then absolutely tears them to pieces, killing them, it's conceivable that depending on the attitude of the Council investigating your dog could still be declared dangerous because the level of response was unreasonable. Something to bear in mind in NSW.

Edited March 4, 2013 by melzawelza

[mantis]

I've had my large dogs aggressively rushed by small dogs many times... but it's still MY responsibility to make sure that MY dogs don't react to the "threat" in a negative manner...

Everyone is responsible for their OWN dogs' behaviour in public... and no-one should expect to be rushed or attacked by ANY dog. BUT, if you own a dog that could do lethal damage and is likely to react badly in public, then please either keep the dog at home, get a qualified behaviourist/trainer, and only ever take the dog to places where it won't be stimulated to react badly.

It is NOT your "right" to exercise a reactive dog in a public space where it could do something unexpected and either injure or kill another dog - provoked or otherwise.

You are not responsible for your dog's actions if rushed at by an off leash dog and yours in on leash in a public place. The person at fault is the one who allowed their dog to be at large and do the rushing and the consequences are irrelevent. You don't have to muzzle reactive dogs or keep reactive dogs away from public places where there may be dogs at large rushing at leashed dogs. It's up to the owners of all dogs to keep them on leash in a public place and not allow them to rush at other dogs and respect the personal space of others.

:cheer:

Not posting in this thread anymore, too many people think it's OK to let off leash dogs to attack on lead dogs, without the on lead dog responding, it's like this.

[Simply Grand]

I don't think there are any circumstances in which I am not responsible for my dog's actions. I control their environment, I am in charge of training and socializing them, I decide what situations they are put in.

I don't think anyone is saying it's ok or acceptable for any off leash dog to rush or attack an onlead dog, or that the onlead dog is should stand still and take it. The point is reasonable responses and management.

Unfortunately size does come into it, it's just a fact that two dogs of similar size and strength are more equipped to fight each other than two very different sized dogs, no matter who 'starts it'. I don't think it is unreasonable to expect a stable dog to understand that another dog is smaller and modify their behaviour accordingly, my larger dog definitely does this and she can't be the only one.

[tdierikx]

I've had my large dogs aggressively rushed by small dogs many times... but it's still MY responsibility to make sure that MY dogs don't react to the "threat" in a negative manner...

Everyone is responsible for their OWN dogs' behaviour in public... and no-one should expect to be rushed or attacked by ANY dog. BUT, if you own a dog that could do lethal damage and is likely to react badly in public, then please either keep the dog at home, get a qualified behaviourist/trainer, and only ever take the dog to places where it won't be stimulated to react badly.

It is NOT your "right" to exercise a reactive dog in a public space where it could do something unexpected and either injure or kill another dog - provoked or otherwise.

You are not responsible for your dog's actions if rushed at by an off leash dog and yours in on leash in a public place. The person at fault is the one who allowed their dog to be at large and do the rushing and the consequences are irrelevent. You don't have to muzzle reactive dogs or keep reactive dogs away from public places where there may be dogs at large rushing at leashed dogs. It's up to the owners of all dogs to keep them on leash in a public place and not allow them to rush at other dogs and respect the personal space of others.

:cheer:

Not posting in this thread anymore, too many people think it's OK to let off leash dogs to attack on lead dogs, without the on lead dog responding, it's like this.

I certainly DON'T think it's OK for ANY dog to attack any other... but I DO think that it's MY responsibility to NOT allow MY dog to react in kind - leash or no leash on either animal.

I'm just as pissed at aggressive off leash dogs as you are mantis... believe it or not...

T.

[Greytmate]

You are not responsible for your dog's actions if rushed at by an off leash dog and yours in on leash in a public place. The person at fault is the one who allowed their dog to be at large and do the rushing and the consequences are irrelevent. You don't have to muzzle reactive dogs or keep reactive dogs away from public places where there may be dogs at large rushing at leashed dogs. It's up to the owners of all dogs to keep them on leash in a public place and not allow them to rush at other dogs and respect the personal space of others.

I do not want to see my dog hurt dogs belonging to irresponsible people. What sort of person are you exactly?

This thread is nasty.

[Her Majesty Dogmad]

You are not responsible for your dog's actions if rushed at by an off leash dog and yours in on leash in a public place. The person at fault is the one who allowed their dog to be at large and do the rushing and the consequences are irrelevent. You don't have to muzzle reactive dogs or keep reactive dogs away from public places where there may be dogs at large rushing at leashed dogs. It's up to the owners of all dogs to keep them on leash in a public place and not allow them to rush at other dogs and respect the personal space of others.

I do not want to see my dog hurt dogs belonging to irresponsible people. What sort of person are you exactly?

This thread is nasty.

Yes, very nasty. Noone with reactive dogs should be taking them out without muzzles. That is highly irresponsible.

[Guest donatella]

I've had my large dogs aggressively rushed by small dogs many times... but it's still MY responsibility to make sure that MY dogs don't react to the "threat" in a negative manner...

Everyone is responsible for their OWN dogs' behaviour in public... and no-one should expect to be rushed or attacked by ANY dog. BUT, if you own a dog that could do lethal damage and is likely to react badly in public, then please either keep the dog at home, get a qualified behaviourist/trainer, and only ever take the dog to places where it won't be stimulated to react badly.

It is NOT your "right" to exercise a reactive dog in a public space where it could do something unexpected and either injure or kill another dog - provoked or otherwise.

You are not responsible for your dog's actions if rushed at by an off leash dog and yours in on leash in a public place. The person at fault is the one who allowed their dog to be at large and do the rushing and the consequences are irrelevent. You don't have to muzzle reactive dogs or keep reactive dogs away from public places where there may be dogs at large rushing at leashed dogs. It's up to the owners of all dogs to keep them on leash in a public place and not allow them to rush at other dogs and respect the personal space of others.

What about these instances:

* leashes that break

* collars that slip

One of my dogs would run up to another dog in excitement to say hello. She is completely harmless but if her leash broke she would run with gusto up to another dog to say hello.

Are you saying it would be my fault if she were mauled by a reactive dog at the other end?

I am working on her "stay" for this instance and she always leashed in public however the above scenario is one of my biggest fears.

[Greytmate]

You are not responsible for your dog's actions if rushed at by an off leash dog and yours in on leash in a public place. The person at fault is the one who allowed their dog to be at large and do the rushing and the consequences are irrelevent. You don't have to muzzle reactive dogs or keep reactive dogs away from public places where there may be dogs at large rushing at leashed dogs. It's up to the owners of all dogs to keep them on leash in a public place and not allow them to rush at other dogs and respect the personal space of others.

I do not want to see my dog hurt dogs belonging to irresponsible people. What sort of person are you exactly?

This thread is nasty.

Yes, very nasty. Noone with reactive dogs should be taking them out without muzzles. That is highly irresponsible.

Rubbish. Not all dogs who are reactive are a danger to other dogs. A lot of reactive dogs will just bark and carry on in an attempt to get the other dog to back off and have no intention of hurting the other dog. My dog is reactive as a result of other dogs rushing, attacking and bullying him and he has never left a mark on another dog. Even when he's been attacked he's never bitten, he's just fended the other dog off until they could be separated. There's a huge difference between this type of reactive dog and a reactive dog that wants to hurt other dogs.

We are obviously talking about the dogs who are dangerously reactive. All dogs will react in some way to being attacked.

[Greytmate]

I understand the thread is about dogs that pose a danger to others but as your statement was that all reactive dogs should be muzzled I wanted to point out that not all reactive dogs are dangerous. Not everyone realises this.

Some dogs react by barking.

Some dogs react by running away.

The reaction we are talking about in this thread, is the reaction of deadly aggressive force. Did you read the story we are discussing? A dog that reacted by killing another dog.

That is the reaction we are talking about here. I hope everyone realises this now.

[Sheridan]

:cheer:

Not posting in this thread anymore, too many people think it's OK to let off leash dogs to attack on lead dogs, without the on lead dog responding, it's like this.

Where has anyone said this?

[Santo66]

I've had my large dogs aggressively rushed by small dogs many times... but it's still MY responsibility to make sure that MY dogs don't react to the "threat" in a negative manner...

Everyone is responsible for their OWN dogs' behaviour in public... and no-one should expect to be rushed or attacked by ANY dog. BUT, if you own a dog that could do lethal damage and is likely to react badly in public, then please either keep the dog at home, get a qualified behaviourist/trainer, and only ever take the dog to places where it won't be stimulated to react badly.

It is NOT your "right" to exercise a reactive dog in a public space where it could do something unexpected and either injure or kill another dog - provoked or otherwise.

You are not responsible for your dog's actions if rushed at by an off leash dog and yours in on leash in a public place. The person at fault is the one who allowed their dog to be at large and do the rushing and the consequences are irrelevent. You don't have to muzzle reactive dogs or keep reactive dogs away from public places where there may be dogs at large rushing at leashed dogs. It's up to the owners of all dogs to keep them on leash in a public place and not allow them to rush at other dogs and respect the personal space of others.

In NSW, this is correct to a degree, as there is a defense of provocation. However a dog can be declared dangerous for 'displaying unreasonable aggression'. That is of course subjective but if a dog rushes your leashed dog and your dog then absolutely tears them to pieces, killing them, it's conceivable that depending on the attitude of the Council investigating your dog could still be declared dangerous because the level of response was unreasonable. Something to bear in mind in NSW.

Is there a degree of reasonable force written into the NSW legislation, or are we talking ACO's making up their own rules?

Noone with reactive dogs should be taking them out without muzzles. That is highly irresponsible

Wouldn't the law require that to complement responsible ownership/managment, but the law doesn't require that and also provides at statutory defence of provocation in the event of a reaction towards a rushing dog.

What about these instances:

* leashes that break

* collars that slip

Irresponsible choice of equipment, or using worn out or damaged equipment, incorrect fitment. I don't think equipment failure is a defence for a dog not being under effective control?

Edited March 4, 2013 by Santo66

[melzawelza]

I've had my large dogs aggressively rushed by small dogs many times... but it's still MY responsibility to make sure that MY dogs don't react to the "threat" in a negative manner...

Everyone is responsible for their OWN dogs' behaviour in public... and no-one should expect to be rushed or attacked by ANY dog. BUT, if you own a dog that could do lethal damage and is likely to react badly in public, then please either keep the dog at home, get a qualified behaviourist/trainer, and only ever take the dog to places where it won't be stimulated to react badly.

It is NOT your "right" to exercise a reactive dog in a public space where it could do something unexpected and either injure or kill another dog - provoked or otherwise.

You are not responsible for your dog's actions if rushed at by an off leash dog and yours in on leash in a public place. The person at fault is the one who allowed their dog to be at large and do the rushing and the consequences are irrelevent. You don't have to muzzle reactive dogs or keep reactive dogs away from public places where there may be dogs at large rushing at leashed dogs. It's up to the owners of all dogs to keep them on leash in a public place and not allow them to rush at other dogs and respect the personal space of others.

In NSW, this is correct to a degree, as there is a defense of provocation. However a dog can be declared dangerous for 'displaying unreasonable aggression'. That is of course subjective but if a dog rushes your leashed dog and your dog then absolutely tears them to pieces, killing them, it's conceivable that depending on the attitude of the Council investigating your dog could still be declared dangerous because the level of response was unreasonable. Something to bear in mind in NSW.

Is there a degree of reasonable force written into the NSW legislation, or are we talking ACO's making up their own rules?

Lots of things in the Act aren't expressly defined, the level of barking for a nuisance dog is just described as 'continuous and persistent' which is subjective, and ACO's just have to make a judgement call on these things. All I'm saying is that it isn't as black and white as you make out in NSW.

If your dog is rushed but then kills the other dog, depending on the individual ACO your dog could be declared dangerous based on unreasonable aggression. You could, of course, appeal that in court, and it'd then be up to the judge as to whether your dog's reaction was unreasonable or not.

Edited March 4, 2013 by melzawelza

[Guest donatella]

I've had my large dogs aggressively rushed by small dogs many times... but it's still MY responsibility to make sure that MY dogs don't react to the "threat" in a negative manner...

Everyone is responsible for their OWN dogs' behaviour in public... and no-one should expect to be rushed or attacked by ANY dog. BUT, if you own a dog that could do lethal damage and is likely to react badly in public, then please either keep the dog at home, get a qualified behaviourist/trainer, and only ever take the dog to places where it won't be stimulated to react badly.

It is NOT your "right" to exercise a reactive dog in a public space where it could do something unexpected and either injure or kill another dog - provoked or otherwise.

You are not responsible for your dog's actions if rushed at by an off leash dog and yours in on leash in a public place. The person at fault is the one who allowed their dog to be at large and do the rushing and the consequences are irrelevent. You don't have to muzzle reactive dogs or keep reactive dogs away from public places where there may be dogs at large rushing at leashed dogs. It's up to the owners of all dogs to keep them on leash in a public place and not allow them to rush at other dogs and respect the personal space of others.

In NSW, this is correct to a degree, as there is a defense of provocation. However a dog can be declared dangerous for 'displaying unreasonable aggression'. That is of course subjective but if a dog rushes your leashed dog and your dog then absolutely tears them to pieces, killing them, it's conceivable that depending on the attitude of the Council investigating your dog could still be declared dangerous because the level of response was unreasonable. Something to bear in mind in NSW.

Is there a degree of reasonable force written into the NSW legislation, or are we talking ACO's making up their own rules?

Noone with reactive dogs should be taking them out without muzzles. That is highly irresponsible

Wouldn't the law require that to complement responsible ownership/managment, but the law doesn't require that and also provides at statutory defence of provocation in the event of a reaction towards a rushing dog.

What about these instances:

* leashes that break

* collars that slip

Irresponsible choice of equipment, or using worn out or damaged equipment, incorrect fitment. I don't think equipment failure is a defence for a dog not being under effective control?

There have been stories here of good equipment breaking unintentionally scaring the owner. It was neither damaged or worn and it was a reputable brand. Not everyone walks their dog with defective ill fitting walking gear, in fact its generally the first priority when taking a dog out in public.

[Santo66]

Lots of things in the Act aren't expressly defined, the level of barking for a nuisance dog is just described as 'continuous and persistent' which is subjective, and ACO's just have to make a judgement call on these things. All I'm saying is that it isn't as black and white as you make out in NSW.

If your dog is rushed but then kills the other dog, depending on the individual ACO your dog could be declared dangerous based on unreasonable aggression. You could, of course, appeal that in court, and it'd then be up to the judge as to whether your dog's reaction was unreasonable or not.

Sorry, that's crap when applied to a statutory defence and unless the act defines reasonable/unreasonable force in the case of a dog, the result of a DD order on a dog who reacted due to the provocation of an unleashed dog who's broken how many laws to provoke........dog at large, dog not under effective control, rushing attacking another animal or person, the satutory defence will overide all of this not withstanding that it's unreasonable to expect a mere dog to understand the limitations of force.........as I said previously, ACO's making up their own rules. I could however imagine an ACO trying to place a DD order on a dog defending it's self and owner from a dog at large attack, some ACO's are pretty stupid and often don't know the rules themselves.