Dog Attack Ashcroft Today

[Jed]

Inez

Australia never needed the pit bull, neopolotan mastif logotto whatever .... german sheperds were banned for decades, this crap about peoples freedom to have whatever they like is why these killer breeds are here. Grief the neo's and logotto's were used by the mafia to kill their victums what one earth makes them relevant to today anyway?

Have you ever seen a lagotto? They are a medium sized retrieving breed.

According to the last article, the dogs were on Council's "companion animal" register as American Bulldogs, which I thought they could have been. Maybe a bit smaller than some, and maybe the second one into the truck was a boxer, but really, who knows?

They were 3 savage dogs which escaped their premises and attacked someone. They could have been anything over about 10k. They formed a pack, and behaved badly. I think Cattle Dogs are still on the top of the bite register.

Hope the poor jogger heals well. So sad.

Edited May 28, 2013 by Jed

[minimax]

Will some people resent having to attend a day's course to get registration for their dogs? Probably they will. Never know though, Diva, the subject matter being dog behaviour, you might find it really interesting and actually enjoy it, might learn something new.

I would resent it. Why should I have to prove I can be a responsible owner just cause my breed of choice weighs over 25 kilos. I've seen 2 kilo fluffballs chase kids out onto a street.

I would too, because chances are the person giving the course would get their knowledge from the back of a cereal box.

[Diva]

I repeat Diva I'm sorry if I have upset you. I don't know who you are or what your knowledge of dogs is. What I meant was that people who are already responsible dog owners, as I assume all dolers are, will not have any problems with any new restrictions or regulations. It was meant to be a compliment. I did put in a smiley face.

I find Internet communication difficult and I don't enjoy unpleasantness so I will now bow out of this thread.

I am not upset at all, just worried by the naivety that assumes new restrictions will have a benign effect on those currently doing the right thing. That is not often how the real world works.

[Rebanne]

Will some people resent having to attend a day's course to get registration for their dogs? Probably they will. Never know though, Diva, the subject matter being dog behaviour, you might find it really interesting and actually enjoy it, might learn something new.

I would resent it. Why should I have to prove I can be a responsible owner just cause my breed of choice weighs over 25 kilos. I've seen 2 kilo fluffballs chase kids out onto a street.

I would too, because chances are the person giving the course would get their knowledge from the back of a cereal box.

exactly and then they would fail me cause I wouldn't be able to keep my mouth shut when they said something stupid which could lead to trouble.

[Dame Aussie]

Inez

Australia never needed the pit bull, neopolotan mastif logotto whatever .... german sheperds were banned for decades, this crap about peoples freedom to have whatever they like is why these killer breeds are here. Grief the neo's and logotto's were used by the mafia to kill their victums what one earth makes them relevant to today anyway?

Have you ever seen a lagotto? They are a medium sized retrieving breed.

According to the last article, the dogs were on Council's "companion animal" register as American Bulldogs, which I thought they could have been. Maybe a bit smaller than some, and maybe the second one into the truck was a boxer, but really, who knows?

They were 3 savage dogs which escaped their premises and attacked someone. They could have been anything over about 10k. They formed a pack, and behaved badly. I think Cattle Dogs are still on the top of the bite register.

Hope the poor jogger heals well. So sad.

Glad you pointed that out Jed.

inez, try educating yourself before spouting nonsense...killer breeds...really? Jeeeesus :laugh:

[Wobbly]

I always just think of it in terms of big dogs, especially since all the little dogs I meet are nice little dogs, and I never read about their attacks, so I always think of them as never an issue, but it's true, if they manage to get at a face they can inflict some grievous wounds.

So yes it probably needs to be all inclusive.

What is needed is education, specifically targeted at people like the owners of these dogs would be better. But that is not possible, unless you have a good idea. So it must neccessarily encompass responsible owners too.

Responsible owners would, I would think, ordinarily attend an obedience class or puppy school with their dogs. Do you resent puppy school or obedience lessons? So consider this to be the much same thing, except it's a one off and the topic is "safe management of your pet dog". The cost of the class is included in your registration fee, you must attend to get your dog registration in full.

[Loving my Oldies]

I am sorry but I don't understand how whether or not an owner has pet insurance will prevent dog attacks ever.

I wasn't saying insurance will stop dog attacks. You were talking about Liability Insurance. A dog can escape a yard, run into the street, a car can swerve to miss it, car jumps the gutter, knocks over a fence, etc etc. That is the sort of unforeseen event I was talking about.

See GeckoTree's post copied below :).

Having liability insurance on dogs wont stop dog attacks, no one said it would, it's liability in the event a dog damages someone you wont loose your house, either the owner of the dog or the victim. This poor guy here who was chewed up probably wont be able to earn any income for a very long time and will no doubt have ongoing medical costs. I hope he was insured personally.

Insurance is not a cash grab in any sense, its a product for life protection.

We have enough laws. They're not enforced. Plain and simple. Councils need more money to hire more ACOs to enforce the laws that already exist.

Sigh .. so absolutely correct, Ruthless . Unfortunately, we are talking about politicians here and getting up on the podium and promising new laws is much more adrenalin pumping than saying, "We will enforce existing laws." Cheaper to promise what will never happen than to hire the necessary numbers and appropriately trained staff to police existing laws.

Makes me want to scream with frustration.

[Luke GSP]

And here is a perfect example of the problem, as soon as you try to come up with a solution, people that own certain dogs, think that all owners should have the extra work to do, and owners on the other side of the fence don't have dogs that they see as a problem, and hence they don't see why they should have the extra work.

The only resolution would be first to define the problem. Are the general public concerned about

1, people being seriously mauled,hospitalised or killed by dogs

2, People being bitten at any level by a dog

3, People feeling threatened by a dog

4, Seeing dogs unleashed in the street

I believe that it is number 1, people want to be protected from the chance of being seriously mauled,hospitalised or killed by dogs. They will then look for the common denominator and attempt to eliminate that. Now in reality there will be several common denominators

Dogs off leash

powerful built dog

children victims

etc, etc the list will go on

They will then cross reference those denominators and see which is most common/and which they can control.

What % of off leash dogs attack people causing serious mauling, hospitalization or death?

What % of serious maulings, hospitalisations or death involved a powerful breed of dog?

What % of children are mauled, hospitalised or killed by dogs? What type of dog (physically, not breed)

Once they have analyised that they will then see what physical, legislative controls that can be put in place.

With that in mind, where do you think they will be drilling the solution to the publics problem down to?

People need to get past the "propensity to bite" argument, it simply carries no weight.

In Australia, what do you reckon you have the greatest chance of being shot by?

1, A water pistol?

2, spud gun?

3, sniper rifle?

Now, which one would you think the government should be having some level of control over? (I'm willing to bet it wasn't the spud gun or water pistol)

[icedmice]

I'm pretty passionate about the topic. I've been to court as a witness to an attack of this nature in Belmore and my friend was a victim of an attack by Amstaffs, they were registered with dogsNSW:

http://www.theherald.com.au/story/116216/teenager-mauled-in-savage-dog-attack/

You'd think the owner would be not allowed to keep dogs after an attack like that but then this happened:

http://www.theherald.com.au/story/1317743/poll-dog-attacks-terrorise-family-a-second-time/

I have a big problem with people breaking the law and getting away with a slap on the wrist and being allowed to re-offend. They demonstrated they were incapable of keeping the community safe.

They give responsible owners of bull/large breeds a bad name. The MAJORITY of people that own them can do so without their dogs going on a psychotic rampage. You don't give a loaded gun back to the shooter!

The disregard the owner showed for the safety of the community resulting in such a savage attack on that poor jogger is truly disgusting. I think harsher penalties should be imposed, there should be NO excuse.

We don't want these sorts of people owning dogs, period. If it were up to me I'd probably confiscate their butter-knives.

Edited May 28, 2013 by icedmice

[Rebanne]

Responsible owners would, I would think, ordinarily attend an obedience class or puppy school with their dogs. Do you resent puppy school or obedience lessons? So consider this to be the much same thing, except it's a one off and the topic is "safe management of your pet dog". The cost of the class is included in your registration fee, you must attend to get your dog registration in full.

I haven't attended a dog training class in years, puppy or otherwise.

Yes all the dickheads will be flocking to class so they can get full registration of their dogs - not!

[Wobbly]

Not concerned with arguements, just with debating relative merits of different solutions.

Laws can't fix this - if people think the laws are unjust, they will break them.

Only educating people in how to manage their dogs safely offers any kind of viable solution. That's something, that made mandatory, people would do, grudgingly perhaps in some cases, but they would.

Concerning the competency of educators, that is definitely an issue. But consider that animal training has developed so much in recent years, that according to Ken Ramirez it must now be considered a technology. It wouldn't be too hard to get videotaped portions done by people well qualified for the job. Plenty of good behaviourists or vet behaviourists would do it very well. You could have Steve Courtney doing a Triangle of Temptation demo. XD A lot of topics that would need to be covered might best be done with video demonstrations. Eg identifying dog body language, reactivity thresholds, possibly an introduction to LAT (would be very beneficial for everyone needing to teach their dog impulse control, which is pretty much everyone with an adolescent dog) etc

ToT, LAT... This is stuff that really everyone who owns a dog should know, it'd help them a lot, but the information is not easily available where it's most needed.

It might be possible to offer some kind of initial video/computer presentation so people could do it at home even?

A practical workshop would be a preferable addition though, it's one thing to watch a video about teaching a dog LAT, quite another to actually teach your dog, especially since probably for most people this would be the first time they ever wielded a clicker.

[icedmice]

Responsible owners would, I would think, ordinarily attend an obedience class or puppy school with their dogs. Do you resent puppy school or obedience lessons? So consider this to be the much same thing, except it's a one off and the topic is "safe management of your pet dog". The cost of the class is included in your registration fee, you must attend to get your dog registration in full.

I haven't attended a dog training class in years, puppy or otherwise.

Yes all the dickheads will be flocking to class so they can get full registration of their dogs - not!

I agree with Wobbly in theory and would have no problem with a large dog management class, I've tossed around the idea of licencing for breeds over a certain weight/size. I'm just sick of people giving owners of bull breeds a bad name.

I've been attending obedience with my dogs for years, more recently I have become an instructor. I've seen reactive dogs make a full turn around.

Our membership and ground fees are next to nothing, you can't even buy a cup of coffee for our ground fees. I've passed out cards and encouraged people to come along, the only person I've been able to convince is my brother, who also recently became an instructor.

A lot of dogs that end up in pounds aren't even micro-chipped, I'd go as far as saying more than half of them easily aren't micro-chipped, and of those that are a high percentage have not been registered with councils so there are no owner details.

We already have laws, but with light or no penalty nobody is going to care. Problem is if current laws aren't enforced, new or changed laws/regulations will make little if any difference.

[Luke GSP]

Not concerned with arguements, just with debating relative merits of different solutions.

Laws can't fix this - if people think the laws are unjust, they will break them.

Only educating people in how to manage their dogs safely offers any kind of viable solution. That's something, that made mandatory, people would do, grudgingly perhaps in some cases, but they would.

Concerning the competency of educators, that is definitely an issue. But consider that animal training has developed so much in recent years, that according to Ken Ramirez it must now be considered a technology. It wouldn't be too hard to get videotaped portions done by people well qualified for the job. Plenty of good behaviourists or vet behaviourists would do it very well. You could have Steve Courtney doing a Triangle of Temptation demo. XD A lot of topics that would need to be covered might best be done with video demonstrations. Eg identifying dog body language, reactivity thresholds, possibly an introduction to LAT (would be very beneficial for everyone needing to teach their dog impulse control, which is pretty much everyone with an adolescent dog) etc

ToT, LAT... This is stuff that really everyone who owns a dog should know, it'd help them a lot, but the information is not easily available where it's most needed.

It might be possible to offer some kind of initial video/computer presentation so people could do it at home even?

A practical workshop would be a preferable addition though, it's one thing to watch a video about teaching a dog LAT, quite another to actually teach your dog, especially since probably for most people this would be the first time they ever wielded a clicker.

All very nice ideas, but in reality, the majority of people do not see the issue as dog training, lets be clear on this PEOPLE ARE AFRAID OF THEM OR THEIR LOVED ONES BEING TORN APART, MAIMED OR KILLED BY DOGS, Nothing more, nothing less. The vast majority of dogs, well behaved or not, well trained or not, are not involved in attacks that end up in fatal or near fatal injuries to humans on a regularly recurring basis. What is the most common denominator in fatal or near fatal attacks, that it is possible (acceptable in the general publics eyes)to be legislated against or controlled?

Not saying that I agree with the natural conclusion by the way, just being a realist.

[Rebanne]

Not concerned with arguements, just with debating relative merits of different solutions.

Laws can't fix this - if people think the laws are unjust, they will break them.

Only educating people in how to manage their dogs safely offers any kind of viable solution. That's something, that made mandatory, people would do, grudgingly perhaps in some cases, but they would.

and the people who ignore the current laws, how will you get them to take notice of any new laws? It is already mandatory to register and microchip your dogs but that is not happening. So enforce those laws for starters.

[Luke GSP]

Responsible owners would, I would think, ordinarily attend an obedience class or puppy school with their dogs. Do you resent puppy school or obedience lessons? So consider this to be the much same thing, except it's a one off and the topic is "safe management of your pet dog". The cost of the class is included in your registration fee, you must attend to get your dog registration in full.

I haven't attended a dog training class in years, puppy or otherwise.

Yes all the dickheads will be flocking to class so they can get full registration of their dogs - not!

you reckon there aren't a heap of irresponsible idiots out ther behind the wheel of cars, trucks, boats etc etc. making someone regurgitate information to pass a test to get something, doesn't mean they will implement what they regurgitated. If it did, there would be no sex offenders in the church, no drug addicts on the street (most schools have a drug education program) no teenage pregnancies (most schools have sex education) No alcoholics, no addicted gamblers. Education on the whole only makes people that would probably not have been the problem anyway even more sure that they won't become a problem. D#ckheads are D#ckheads simples.

[Wobbly]

The problem is education. Most people with a fear aggressive dog think they have an "Alpha" dog. I come across this all the time, it's ludicrous. People thinking their snarling, slavering dog is tough when the poor thing is screaming in terror. The problem is, as always, ignorance.

OK I am so running with this idea, I don't care how much everyone hates it. :laugh: For the video demonstrations; Steve Courtney doing the ToT, we could have Cosmolo for an introduction to dog reactivity and managing it. Erny would easily be persuaded to help too, her choice of what component to take - there is so much to cover I am not actually sure what is neccessary & what is fluff. Glenn Cooke too. Nekhbet to do the hardass stuff - the things people don't neccessarily want to hear, but must hear. Don't need to stay local, making a video means you could use anyone, McDevitt, McConnell, whoever you please. I am using people you know so you can conceive of how education can and does make a huge difference.

All the information people need to manage any dog safely is out there and available, but sometimes it can be hard to access, and it's not getting through to where it's needed. It actually does need to be shoved in people's faces or it will never filter through.

[Staffyluv]

I remember watching horrified as an american dog catcher was attacked on the news no one game to come to her aid. Their reputation for making entry to rough areas downright dangerous without even worrying about the street gangs.

it began when the bull breeds began to be popular in american cities, it began here when some (far as I am concerned, )idiot in quarantine allowed the first imported pit bulls to arrive in this country.

they were never needed they were advertised for years for 3,000 to 5,000 on the main solely for the bogan lethal weapon market.

What we are seeing is sadly the norm in america before they were allowed here.

like it or not there are nore bogans than responsible people owning these dogs.

they used to hve cattle dogs so savage they bit anyone who came on or near their land, the the fashion became german shepherds and Dobermans and then Rotti's. Now one of the most effiecient fighting dogs arrived they flocked to acquire their status symbol.

Who cares about the freedom of those like that tragic jogger.

Australia never needed the pit bull, neopolotan mastif logotto whatever .... german sheperds were banned for decades, this crap about peoples freedom to have whatever they like is why these killer breeds are here. Grief the neo's and logotto's were used by the mafia to kill their victums what one earth makes them relevant to today anyway?

Ive seen how dangerous an unsupervised neo can be and he hadnt even made it to 12 months old. every one around his owners heaved a sigh of relief when he died.

Dont tell me the lethal weapon mentally isnt in many of the dogs owners, that guy with his pitti pup was strutting with pride of what his pup could do when it grew up. Thats how I learned how he lost his previous two.

People like him scare the daylights out me, that pup wasnt going to be raised to be a good canine citizen even if it was going to be registered as goodness knows what.

Perhaps before you go on a rant, you might like to do a bit of research on the 'breeds' you are bashing on about.

People (and the media) who refuse to educate themselves on what is what in the dog world are part of the problem..

Perhaps if people knew what a pit bull looked like, then they wouldn't be blamed for every single dog attack in the country.

I disagree with your notion that Australia didn't need certain breeds. We don't live in a Nazi state and can have the dog of our choice (apart from those that are now restricted).

The restricted breeds are:

• Pit Bull Terrier Breeds, includes the American Pit Bull Terrier
  
• Japanese Tosa
  
• Dogo Argentino (Argentinian fighting dog)
  
• Fila Brasileiro (Brazilian fighting dog)
  
• Perro de Presa Canario
  
• Any dog that is any part restricted breed, declared by a Council under Division 6 of the Companion Animals Act
  
• Any other dog of a breed, kind or description prescribed by the Companion Animals Regulation
  

Just so you know - here is a picture of a Lagotto (sweet little things they are). :)

[Dame Aussie]

[Sandra777]

It is my understanding that the dogs have been identified by the council as American Bulldogs.

[raz]

Huh? lagotti are gun dogs and truffle dogs. Where do you get your information from, inez?