Dog Attack Ashcroft Today

[Wobbly]

Do you know what, it strikes me that I am actually the exact kind of bogan most of you fear and loathe. :laugh:

I also am a firm advocate of the tenets of Martin Luther King Jr.

"One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws."

If you enforce the current laws, as they stand I will disobey. I have no choice in this because of my dogs appearance. She is good with people, would lick a jogger, doubles as a drumkit for my one year old god-son (under strict supervision obviously because his sticky fingers might roam eyewards.) The law in my state would require she is never out of a 10x10 cage without a muzzle, which I find... frankly morally unjust.

So, as the law stands, my dog and I are criminalised, my back is to the wall on this. I'm forced into civil disobedience in protest of unjust laws that directly affect me. I can live with that, hell have done for years, but I'd certainly prefer to be on the right side of the law. Make a good law so i can be.

So ideas for better laws?

An education program and perhaps a workshop? Awesome, education is about as morally just as it gets, I would obey that law with all the smug righteousness of anyone else who diligently adheres to just laws.

[tdierikx]

The dogs were chipped as American Bulldogs - which is possibly what they were judging by the footage shown of their seizure. doesn't necessarily mean they actually were American Bulldogs, Aussie Bulldogs, Pitbull crosses, AmStaff, or any other combination of bull breeds...

All the public sees is "large bull breed that attacked a person" and the media hype that they must have been "pitbulls" because of same...

I know some large Labradoodles that could do similar damage if so inclined, also some Standard Poodles, Labradors, Golden Retrievers, Weimaraners, Dalmatians, etc, etc... should we restrict ownership of all of those breeds too because if raised the "wrong way", they could possibly harm someone?

T.

[Luke GSP]

Most people don't know the difference between an AK47 and an M15 but they know that they are dangerous and want some form of protection from the government that is charged with protecting them. What the public know is that some guns (out of water pistols spud guns and firearms) make a loud bang and tend to have a negative outcome for whatever they were pointed at when the bang happened.

The problem is not about the publics grasp of the finer points of dog identification, The problem is that dogs that are capable of causing extreme harm and death are in the hands of idiots. Now, as pointed out, we don't live in a nazi state and hence cleansing society of everyone that is deemed an idiot (not sure how you would measure/quantify that analysis though as I have met some extremely intelligent intellectual idiots) is probably out of the question, what target do you reckon the government will go for? It will be the dog type that is the highest common denominator in the types of attack/outcome that the public find the most distressing. That dog type is not smal, white or fluffy, it's not one of the gundog or "agricultural working breeds".

In regard to the monster of a lagotto, please remove that picture before it gives people nightmares!

[melzawelza]

Horrific attack. Completely unacceptable and I'm glad the dogs have been put to sleep (although I wish further assessment of their temperament and behaviour, as well as an autopsy was done).

Lots of people with ideas on this thread on what they think may work to reduce these sorts of attacks. Some have some merit, other breed-specific posts are ridiculous.

Thing is, we don't need to speculate about all this. We already know what the answer is to dramatically reducing dog attack incidents. It's been done already with great success in towns and cities around the world. Our legislators should be charged as far as I'm concerned for persisting with BSL (proven NOT to work by many many studies) and ignoring the models that do work.

For those that are interested in understanding the issues the NCRC website is a wonderful well resourced and educated site.

National Canine Research Council

This page in particular is relevant to the discussion, on what actually works and is enforceable when it comes to community safety with dogs:

Effective Vs Ineffective laws

It's not rocket science but it just seems to be too much effort for our legislators to bother with, especially when BSL is so popular amongst the uneducated general public (and it seems some passionate dog owners going by this thread, which is very disappointing).

I think we need to remember to that overwhelmingly dogs are incredibly safe to be around. These incidents do happen but the likelihood of being badly attacked or killed by a dog is very slim. Almost all dogs of all breeds or types in our society do not attack.

Edited May 28, 2013 by melzawelza

[Wobbly]

Mel, that link is awesome. I found:

http://www.nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/uploaded_files/publications/1970766974_Dog%20Bites%20Problems%20and%20Solutions.pdf

Recommendations for effective legislature include:

5.2 Focus prevention resources on education

Most of the exposure to dog-bite injury risk can be mitigated by providing appropriate education to well-intentioned but misinformed and/or uninformed guardians, and to the public at large

There's been some pretty remarkable strides in progress as regards our knowledge of dog behaviour, but people need to be educated to benefit.

5.2.2 Educating dog guardians in puppy-raising techniques to minimize aggression:

Methods and resources

Several major provocations for dog bites (food and object

guarding, handling sensitivity, and wariness of strangers) can be

substantially mitigated by proper puppy-raising techniques.

Requiring or providing incentives to guardians to attend training

classes certified to address these issues would have a far-reaching

preventive effect. Many communities now charge variable

registration fees depending on the reproductive status of a dog; a

similar mechanism could be applied to puppy-class attendance,

and the majority of the expense would be borne by the guardian

Quite so.

The fear of of a trainer with qualifications from a cereal box is valid though. Might be better if part was video, to ensure quality of information. Well meaning, but misinformed volunteer trainers giving out incorrect advice to all and sundry won't help.

[Dame Aussie]

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

That's what I thought they were, thanks Sandra.

[Cosmolo]

But Wobbly you can't even get trainers to agree on what is 'right' and what's not. And what do we do with those who don't want to be educated? This is where serious enforcement of CURRENT laws needs to step up.

[melzawelza]

Mel, that link is awesome. I found:

http://www.nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/uploaded_files/publications/1970766974_Dog%20Bites%20Problems%20and%20Solutions.pdf

Recommendations for effective legislature include:

5.2 Focus prevention resources on education

Most of the exposure to dog-bite injury risk can be mitigated by providing appropriate education to well-intentioned but misinformed and/or uninformed guardians, and to the public at large

There's been some pretty remarkable strides in progress as regards our knowledge of dog behaviour, but people need to be educated to benefit.

5.2.2 Educating dog guardians in puppy-raising techniques to minimize aggression:

Methods and resources

Several major provocations for dog bites (food and object

guarding, handling sensitivity, and wariness of strangers) can be

substantially mitigated by proper puppy-raising techniques.

Requiring or providing incentives to guardians to attend training

classes certified to address these issues would have a far-reaching

preventive effect. Many communities now charge variable

registration fees depending on the reproductive status of a dog; a

similar mechanism could be applied to puppy-class attendance,

and the majority of the expense would be borne by the guardian

Quite so.

The fear of of a trainer with qualifications from a cereal box is valid though. Might be better if part was video, to ensure quality of information. Well meaning, but misinformed volunteer trainers giving out incorrect advice to all and sundry won't help.

NCRC are totally awesome, as are Animal Farm Foundation when it comes to data and science driven approches to animal management. I just spent five days with AFF which included a lecture with the president of the NCRC. Incredibly valuable information.

[KJJ]

I know some large Labradoodles that could do similar damage if so inclined, also some Standard Poodles, Labradors, Golden Retrievers, Weimaraners, Dalmatians, etc, etc... should we restrict ownership of all of those breeds too because if raised the "wrong way", they could possibly harm someone?

T.

The only dog I have been badly attacked by (as in jumped a fence and unprovoked bit me multiple times resulting in calf wounds that required medical treatment) was a Labrador, I'm a 6ft tall woman so I shudder to think what would have happen to a child in the same circumstances - and that was from a breed that is universally thought of in the media as a 'good dog', family friendly etc (hell from what I see on TV the main issue is stopping the damn things from bringing you toilet paper :p ), that coupled with the fact that I own (and have owned) a bull breed makes me skeptical about banning specific breeds - I'd much rather ban irresponsible people from dog ownership, some people just don't deserve it

[BlackJaq]

Wow, that "logotto" is clearly terrifying. I can see why the mafia has chosen this dog, victims would have suffered extreme fear and distress before being torn apart by that monster (landshark?)

[inez]

Wow, that "logotto" is clearly terrifying. I can see why the mafia has chosen this dog, victims would have suffered extreme fear and distress before being torn apart by that monster (landshark?)

so true it was something else similar to the neo but took a guess and foot firmly in mouth.

yes everyone has their rights to own whatever dog they like or love.

Trouble is if they cant keep the bastard at home and it maims or kills they should be charged. Big time, regardless of breed .

but that aint going to happen is it.

I have no idea why BSL was thought it was going to do anything but send every named breed underground. As others have said, other breeds can and have transgressed too. Yes Im scared of the apb I think bearing in mind the tragadies of the past are the reason, although I equally steer clear of rotties and german shepherds, two fast dissappearing breeds by comparison, anyway, Why is that?

People have used their rights to let their dogs run loose for decades, now there are much more effective breeds love em to death all you like the photos and the deeds were happening in america before the extra guns arrived.

now they are here it would be wonderful if the so busy "Nsw Companion Animal Taskforce" widened its blinkers and for example made it perhaps a 1,000 fine for any dog found running loose on the street without an awfully good explaination. eg,tradesman left the gate open, burgler or something like that. accidents do happen. But almost without exception it seems neighbours have not been happy with said animals in the past, before they went for the headlines.

At least one advantage of living in the country such dogs rarely get to the attention of the press or pound,they tend to be shot if their owner doesnt care enough to keep them home and away from stock. Instead then the headlines tend to be someone went into the yard while the owner wasnt home.

I remember the calls around the neighbours when a pack of german shepherds was sighted out for their 3rd run killing, the neighbours were caught napping the first two times. there were rifles on every hill the 3rd time they arrived to finish off the neighbours goats. No one came looking for their lost dogs so never know where they came from.

tally 25 dead goats to the dogs, 3 dead dogs to the neighbours, 5 surviving goats

Edited May 28, 2013 by inez

[Adnil444]

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)

Totally agree with you.

What I can't understand that there are some posters on here saying that these dogs could have been any breed, but blind freddy can see that they were bully breeds of some description.

[Her Majesty Dogmad]

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.

That is absolutely disgusting and this is half the problem. The councils can't or won't act upon complaints, they "speak" to the owners and the situation continues. That's what it's like here, I complained about an Amstaff being loose, no owners in sight. They don't have any fencing around their yard. It may not be aggressive towards other dogs but it could well be - the last time the owner saw me coming with my little dogs (on lead of course) she rushed to put the dog on a leash as it was loose in her yard at the time. Nothing can be done to fix this problem it seems so I have to sit and hope that eventually this owner and dog will move out and go and inflict themselves on another street/suburb. It shouldn't be so easy. Even if they do move, I've still got the other loose bull breeds to worry about so do I have to stay home for the rest of my life or drive suburbs away to try and walk my dogs? It is not good enough that I pay the price for irresponsible people, that the quality of my life is degraded.

Edited May 28, 2013 by dogmad

[inez]

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)

Totally agree with you.

What I can't understand that there are some posters on here saying that these dogs could have been any breed, but blind freddy can see that they were bully breeds of some description.

trouble is its not politiclly correct to notice the obvious

[inez]

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.

That is absolutely disgusting and this is half the problem. The councils can't or won't act upon complaints, they "speak" to the owners and the situation continues. That's what it's like here, I complained about an Amstaff being loose, no owners in sight. They don't have any fencing around their yard. It may not be aggressive towards other dogs but it could well be - the last time the owner saw me coming with my little dogs (on lead of course) she rushed to put the dog on a leash as it was loose in her yard at the time. Nothing can be done to fix this problem it seems so I have to sit and hope that eventually this owner and dog will move out and go and inflict themselves on another street/suburb. It shouldn't be so easy. Even if they do move, I've still got the other loose bull breeds to worry about so do I have to stay home for the rest of my life or drive suburbs away to try and walk my dogs? It is not good enough that I pay the price for irresponsible people, that the quality of my life is degraded.

Delightful, the pedigreed progeny of the two first offenders came back and had a go at finishing the job. Wonder when someone might notice the tendancy seems to be proving inherited?

There are kennels in America openly admitting APB and Amstaff are one in the same, have been for decades. There is about as much difference between the "breeds" as there is between ANKC cattledogs and never registered cattledogs, both evolved in Australa. Just like the imports evolved in America. Except they were evolved with very different jobs in mind. One is a herding and possession protector. The other is a pit fighter.

just a very slight difference in mentality bred for, yet with a huge difference in lethal attacks.

Thank god even the bogans cattle dogs go for the legs if they are nice and savage as their masters want.

The majority of them either let you in and wont let you out. AS my landlord can attest one very embarrassing day. He had to wait 2 hours till I got home as she wouldnt let him leave the verandah.

Or charge the gate and wont let strangers enter. my family have had cattle dogs since I was born. I cannot remember them ever biting someone, but they sure scared the living daylights out of anyone who wasnt invited in.

How many cattledog have hit the headlines for bringing some one down in the last 30 years, let alone killed anyone?

I dont know many people who dont fear them.

Luckily the bogans seem to have lost interest in slecting and keeping the really savage ones, ditto for the german shepherd and the rotti. no where near the status symbol the apt's have, altough as someone noticed its the french bulldog thats pulling the 3,000 per pup these days instead.

hopefully they have a sweeter nature, I know nothing about them. they do seem to look quite cute.

[Staffyluv]

Bully breeds of some description.. (Not having a go at the writer above, just pulling the statement because that is how Joe Public see it).

Sadly that statement alone shows how little people realise what they are doing to a whole range of dog breeds and types by stuffing 'bully breeds' into one category.

That is everything from French Bulldogs to American Bulldogs and Bull Terriers, Amstaffs to SBTs and Pit bulls all in the same group. They are all very different breeds/types and in each breed/type, you are going to get some dogs that are alike and some that are not..

It isn't about the breed, it can't be that simple. There are so many variables in 'bully breeds'.

Education goes a long way these days.

I agree with an earlier statement that the owners of these dogs need to feel the full force of the law when horrors like this happen.

If the law isn't strong enough, then it needs to change to start making an example of the people that own these dogs and don't protect the public from them..

Edited to add for inez, you need to ggogle French bulldog. They are about the size of a pug..

Edited May 28, 2013 by Staffyluv

[inez]

Bully breeds of some description.. (Not having a go at the writer above, just pulling the statement because that is how Joe Public see it).

Sadly that statement alone shows how little people realise what they are doing to a whole range of dog breeds and types by stuffing 'bully breeds' into one category.

That is everything from French Bulldogs to American Bulldogs and Bull Terriers, Amstaffs to SBTs and Pit bulls all in the same group. They are all very different breeds/types and in each breed/type, you are going to get some dogs that are alike and some that are not..

It isn't about the breed, it can't be that simple. There are so many variables in 'bully breeds'.

Education goes a long way these days.

I agree with an earlier statement that the owners of these dogs need to feel the full force of the law when horrors like this happen.

If the law isn't strong enough, then it needs to change to start making an example of the people that own these dogs and don't protect the public from them..

I forgot the poor staffies and the Bull terrier for a little while grabbed their interest, which in a way was a good thing, english bull terrier's and staffies are pretty much as different as chalk and cheese to the american bull breeds, its a bit hard to train them not to help the burgler to take out the furniture isnt it. :)

Edited May 28, 2013 by inez

[trinabean]

How many cattledog have hit the headlines for bringing some one down in the last 30 years, let alone killed anyone?

How about this attack in Broken Hill: My link

And even the generally reliable ABC like to illustrate a dog attack story with a 'scary breed' stock photo.

In stories about the cattle dog mix attacks and aftermath, they used a GSD photo here: My link

And then a Boxer here: My link

The attack that the thread is originally about was horrific. I hope the injured people recover. I also hope that the owners of the offending dogs are punished. And if I could dream a little, prohibited from owning ANY dogs again.

As Staffyluv said so well:

"Sadly that statement alone shows how little people realise what they are doing to a whole range of dog breeds and types by stuffing 'bully breeds' into one category.

That is everything from French Bulldogs to American Bulldogs and Bull Terriers, Amstaffs to SBTs and Pit bulls all in the same group. They are all very different breeds/types and in each breed/type, you are going to get some dogs that are alike and some that are not..

It isn't about the breed, it can't be that simple. There are so many variables in 'bully breeds'.

Education goes a long way these days.

I agree with an earlier statement that the owners of these dogs need to feel the full force of the law when horrors like this happen.

If the law isn't strong enough, then it needs to change to start making an example of the people that own these dogs and don't protect the public from them.."

Edited May 28, 2013 by trinabean

[tdierikx]

Try getting a ranger from pretty much any council in Sydney to come out for a roaming dog - they won't come unless a member of the public has contained the dog for them... and you can completely forget any service at all outside of business hours...

I'd like to see much steeper penalties for people who flaunt the current dog laws. Not registered, not chipped, not contained adequately, menace, etc. I'd like to see more manpower given to those tasked with doing the job - most councils are sorely understaffed when it comes to rangers.

I can remember a time when dogs that roamed the streets weren't deemed automagically dangerous... used to play with quite a few as a child - and when we kids went in for dinner, the dogs would also go to their homes of their own volition. Fond memories of a Collie Rough and a Newfoundland that regularly came out to play with us. Either dog out playing with kids today would be looked upon with suspicion and/or fear... *sigh*

T.

[juice]

Perhaps this is the problem, dogs were exposed to so more when we weren't so anti dog.

Dogs became used at a young age to seeing kids running and screaming, now they are kept in tiny backyards, and are not allowed in so many places.

Perhaps its been done the wrong way around, if we remove them from everyday life and they suddenly get out they are too reactive?

Education is a good start, but i would like to see the stats on the people who own the dogs who have done the most damage, i'm sure they are exactly the sort who wouldn't go to any training or even reg dogs, so pointless.

I too get no response from rangers on dogs out loose, my neighbour 2 doors up had a bull breed x who almost killed a neighbours cat on its front lawn in front of their kids ,it was then out on a weekly basis after having a nuisance order placed on it, i rang counci 3 times, it was sitting on my doorstep allday and they never turned up once, and this dog would rush poeple and try and bite them too, and had an order on it, useless!!!