Re: Controlling Dogs... : Wed Mar 27, 2013 11:15 pm  

Its funny how things turn out sometimes. This morning was just like any other till my wife rang me at work to let me know the local vets faebook page had details of a dog that would be put down tomorrow if nobody wanted him.
Anyhow we're about to become the owner of a two year old cross between a staffy and something else - probably a labrador going off appearances. Took him for a walk tonight seems a bit excitable but otherwise a nice dog - kids are made up. I'll probably be back to ask some advice from the dog owners on here in the next few weeks lol.

Re: Controlling Dogs... : Wed Mar 27, 2013 11:20 pm  

CORNISH wrote:

not all staffies are "devil dogs"

So? They were bred for their aggression and fighting. You can find tigers that would be perfect house pets. But would you?

[Durham Giant]

Re: Controlling Dogs... : Thu Mar 28, 2013 12:04 am  

Any dog that is badly treat could turn out top be dangerous regardless of breed.

I dont really know the answer because virtually everything you try will have some flaws in it.

I do think that the law should be changed so that owners are responsible for their dogs.

I do not know all the details of the case in the news and can olny comment on bits that have ben reported but

As i understand the woman who owned the dogs that killed the girl knew they were dangerous ( although not dangerous breeds) as did all the locals but did nothing.
She should be liable for their actions because her negligence was a contributory factor in what happened. Even H & S law maybe appropriate

Even a financial penalty although it does nothing to help this poor girl and her family would encourage owners to have to accept some reponsiblity for their pets.

Re: Controlling Dogs... : Thu Mar 28, 2013 6:55 am  

cod'ead wrote: Why didn't you have your retreiver de-nadded if you feel so strongly about male castration? My dog's whole and will probably remain so. Apart from the fact I couldn't take him to the vet to have a procedure I wouldn't wish on myself, my mate has a big soft labrador who, since having his balls off, now barks at anything and everything that moves. Something he never did while he still had his goolies Its something that I did seriously consider and consulted the vet on when he was younger actually, at the time the vet suggested that he should be a little bit older and from memory it wasn't recommended for young puppies before they'd fully developed, my motivation for it was after losing our first GSD through secondary cancers after mammary tumours were found in most of her teats, something that is greatly reduced in spayed females, the risk of testicular cancers in males is as high as mammary tumours in females apparently. There's quite a good article about the subject here http://www.apbc.org.uk/articles/neuteringmaledogs which highlights the fact that its not a guaranteed answer to male dog aggressive behaviour, or what we should really call defensive behaviour, all I can report on is what I find in my own castrated young male GSD, he is perfectly socialised around other dogs, does not show any aggression towards other dogs when he is off the lead in our local park, indeed he will prefer to ignore or take a wide berth around other dogs and when one runs towards him he'll show passive behaviour, with humans he is totally submissive - just to underline this he is now a large male and weighs around his full adult weight of 40kg, if he pulls on the lead then you know about it and the females in the house won't walk him on the lead because of that, potentially, and if aggressive, then he could be very dangerous indeed as could any large breed dog including the "soft" breeds (see my earlier vets comment about retrievers).

cod'ead wrote: Why didn't you have your retreiver de-nadded if you feel so strongly about male castration? My dog's whole and will probably remain so. Apart from the fact I couldn't take him to the vet to have a procedure I wouldn't wish on myself, my mate has a big soft labrador who, since having his balls off, now barks at anything and everything that moves. Something he never did while he still had his goolies Its something that I did seriously consider and consulted the vet on when he was younger actually, at the time the vet suggested that he should be a little bit older and from memory it wasn't recommended for young puppies before they'd fully developed, my motivation for it was after losing our first GSD through secondary cancers after mammary tumours were found in most of her teats, something that is greatly reduced in spayed females, the risk of testicular cancers in males is as high as mammary tumours in females apparently. There's quite a good article about the subject here http://www.apbc.org.uk/articles/neuteringmaledogs which highlights the fact that its not a guaranteed answer to male dog aggressive behaviour, or what we should really call defensive behaviour, all I can report on is what I find in my own castrated young male GSD, he is perfectly socialised around other dogs, does not show any aggression towards other dogs when he is off the lead in our local park, indeed he will prefer to ignore or take a wide berth around other dogs and when one runs towards him he'll show passive behaviour, with humans he is totally submissive - just to underline this he is now a large male and weighs around his full adult weight of 40kg, if he pulls on the lead then you know about it and the females in the house won't walk him on the lead because of that, potentially, and if aggressive, then he could be very dangerous indeed as could any large breed dog including the "soft" breeds (see my earlier vets comment about retrievers).

Re: Controlling Dogs... : Thu Mar 28, 2013 7:05 am  

On national news last night they interviewed a trackie-wearing, near-neighbour of the unfortunate girl, who admitted to owning a Rotty x Japanese Akita. He admitted his dog was aggressive and for that reason was kept locked in the garden and only came into the house when he was present. For the life of me, I cannot understand why anyone would want to own such a dog.

Our sprollie is as soft as a brush, he shares the flat with cats, a cockatoo and bearded dragons, with never a cross word between them. Any strange footsteps approaching bring an immediate protective response, he growls when we first get a new postman but sits at the door wagging his tail on any subsequent visit. He seems comfortable with his place in "our pack". If I'm not around, he does whatever Emma tells him but if we're both in the flat and she gives him an order, he'll always look to me for confirmation. I walk him around town without a lead, he stops and sits at each kerb without prompting and will not move until told to "walk". I won't let Emma walk him off the lead, simply because she's a fooking airhead, whereas I am constantly looking ahead for other dogs, traffic etc. If he sees another dog approaching he usually stops and looks to me for instructions.

Re: Controlling Dogs... : Thu Mar 28, 2013 7:08 am  

cod'ead wrote:

On national news last night they interviewed a trackie-wearing, near-neighbour of the unfortunate girl, who admitted to owning a Rotty x Japanese Akita. He admitted his dog was aggressive and for that reason was kept locked in the garden and only came into the house when he was present. For the life of me, I cannot understand why anyone would want to own such a dog.

No, neither can I, and its organisations like The Dogs Trust who end up picking up the pieces of irresponsible breeding like that when the owner decides after six months that he doesn't want this toy anymore.

Re: Controlling Dogs... : Thu Mar 28, 2013 9:01 am  

Last August. My daughter was attacked whilst in our local park by two dogs who then ripped our pet springer spanial apart in front of her.
She had the two dogs taken by the police because of a pending court case which is next Wed.
She has now got two more dogs and is walking them around the same park.

Something has to be done.

Re: Controlling Dogs... : Thu Mar 28, 2013 11:27 am  

And the governments answer to all of this? Microchipping!! From 2016 every single dog will have to have to be compulsory microchipped, which in principle is a great idea, every dog will have its details stored in him so every single dog will be traceable.....or will it? Owners sell dogs, owners move on, dogs get passed around and details will not be changed on the database. The databases also charge an admin fee to change details too.

Common sense above all else is what makes a good, responsible dog owner. 5 dogs in a small house, 2 of them "large" breeds is just not sensible. I love boxers, I adore them, have done since I worked in a vets and used to see loads, but I know boxers are not the right breed for me, mainly because of my condition, I just don't have the physical strength to train or walk them, so I chose a small lurcher and a cross staffy/collie.

Ban puppy farms, make breeders be registered and monitored, make sure the bitch never has any more than one litter a year and is neutered as soon as she is too old, spay and neuter every stray/shelter dog and you might get somewhere.

I've also said in the past to own a dog you should have to by law, go on basic training courses and learn the basics of training and the very basics of dog behaviour (something which I am very interested in and read up on myself anyway).

My two are well behaved, they are not usually around children, but if they are I make sure they are well supervised. They have passed their Kennel Club Good Citizen bronze award and training never stops, at home or while we are out. They still bark at anyone who "dares" walk down the drive but thats ok with me, being at home alone during the day when they bark reassures me, but thats where it ends. Once I invite the person who "dared" walk down the drive in the house, the barking stops, they have a greet and treat and then its back to what they do best....sleep!!

I know plenty of dogs which are the same breeds as the ones in the news, and they are well loved, well balanced, good natured dogs, two american bulls near me are daft as brushes, wanting fusses and to play with other dogs. The problem lies when you get inexperienced owners who have no idea of the breed of dogs needs but see them as "status" dogs that as long as you feed them cheap food from the local supermarket and let them out in the "yard" then they will be ok.

Re: Controlling Dogs... : Thu Mar 28, 2013 12:22 pm  

Breeders are the problem. All breeders should have to be registered with minimum standards for them to keep their license. Strict and draconian penalties for unregistered breeders.

A good breeder will be breeding out any aggressive qualities. Bad ones are specifically breeding them in. A good breeder wouldn’t sell a large or demanding dog to someone out at work all day or without the land and space to accommodate them. A bad one doesnt care.

There is no way that, as was reported, 5 big game dogs should be kept in a small house in an urban area like that. It is totally unsuitable to start with. Even if those dogs were properly bred, even if they didn’t have the genetic problems which are growing in those breeds because of poor breeding, Even if they were well trained or even not trained with the intention of being aggressive that environment is asking for trouble.

I’ve had big dogs, I have had absolutely huge dog, Sadly we lost my 15st newfie just over a year ago. He was huge, over 6ft 5” on his hind legs, nieces and nephews would pull his hair, fingers in his face, tugging on his ears, never a murmur. Because he was a well bred dog, with a suitable environment who found his place in the pack. He was a very very safe dog, so safe that he ‘worked’ with old people.

There is nothing inherently dangerous about big dogs, nor are there inherently ‘aggressive’ dogs. What there are bad breeders, bad owners, and very occasionally, vocal and demanding dogs whose role shouldn’t be ‘family pet’. If a dog is out of control, it isn’t the dogs fault. At some stage there is a human to blame.

Re: Controlling Dogs... : Thu Mar 28, 2013 1:36 pm  

Dogs themselves are not the problem. Uncontrolled breeding, which promotes all manner and psychological and physiological deformities in the breeds is the problem.

If you have controlled breeding under some form of licenced breeder scheme, then those traits can be bred out of existence (as the KC are now starting to do with show dogs under Fit for Life).

If you want a dog, you either buy from a licenced breeder or you adopt from a rescue centre, where in both cases the dog will have been health/temprament screened before they get near your home.

If you buy from private individuals either online, or off the notice board at work, or through the classifieds in the paper you often have absolutely no idea what you're getting and what its genetic lineage is. It's the equivalent of picking up a homeless person off the street and inviting them to come and live in your house.