Re: Dogs : Sat Nov 09, 2013 7:02 am  

cod'ead wrote:

My dog, a 6 year old springer x collie, is the most placid, laid back dog I've ever owned. Around two years ago he developed a dislike of attention from young (7-10 years old), blonde girls. If one comes close, he simply turns his head and issues a low, gentle growl.

Now bearing in mind that I've had him from 10 weeks old, this behaviour only manifested itself a couple of years ago and I cannot recollect a single incident where he's had a bad encounter with a young girl, I'm at a complete loss to any explanation for this behaviour. I am now wary of any young girl approaching him but am frankly amazed at the behaviour of some parents. During the Summer we were walking along the high street and while waiting to cross the road, a mother and her two children came behind us. The girl of around 8 years, simply said "lovely doggy" and wrapped her arms around his neck. When I berated the mother for allowing her daughter to behave in such a way with a strange dog, she told me that if I had "a dangerous dog, I shouldn't let it out in public".

I simply walked away shaking my head

I once had a little boy, probably no older than three years old, run up to our 40kg GSD who was almost as tall as the kid himself, put his arm over the dogs shoulder and kiss the back of the dogs head while the parents stood and watched, complete strangers in a park, it was cute to see but of course the first thing a dog does is to turn its head to see what the hell is going on & could easily have knocked the kid over, you've also got a dog with a mouth as wide as the kids head now within inches of the kids face and a more nervous dog could have become very defensive - all was well because I had him on a short lead and he is a placid dog but completely irresponsible behaviour from the parents.

I've often been asked by parents of young kids in the park if their kids can stroke him and we're always happy to oblige when the dog is sitting and I am holding his head so that he doesn't turn quickly when the kid approaches, dogs are often more predictable in their behaviour than kids.

Re: Dogs : Sat Nov 09, 2013 1:59 pm  

1905 wrote:

I don't wish to start a debate about the character of various breads.

I thought were were in for another barm/bread cake debate...

Re: Dogs : Sat Nov 09, 2013 6:00 pm  

Dog ownership is similar to gun ownership, in that both, once they get in the wrong hands, become very, very dangerous.

I still can't understand how a dog, especially of the bulldog variety, can so easily be obtained by ANYBODY, with no form of licensing or investigation into a potential owner's background - What is even more astounding, is that it is almost universally accepted that a lot of these bull-type breeds, have become some sort of status symbol for the more undesirable members of society and yet we still allow the purchasing of these animals to be as simple as buying a loaf of bread.

From all the various bits of evidence that has emerged about this present tragedy, my own opinion is that to leave that poor girl in a room alone with a loaded gun, would have been safer than leaving her with that dog - It pains me to blame the parent, because she will have to live with the horrific incident for the rest of her life, but her parental judgement is probably on a par with when the McCann's decided a night out with their mates was a good idea.

Re: Dogs : Sat Nov 09, 2013 6:52 pm  

my brothers 2 year old 40kg+ labweiler is a very boisterous and playful dog, he has his issues as well as he was never socialised properly (left in a garden with a bunch of toddlers to play with him until my brother got him at 10 months). He's great with kids most of the time but he is very easily unsettled when he's in unfamiliar surroundings or around other dogs that he doesn't know. He's very intelligent in that you can see he plays very differently with me (all 6'4 of me) as opposed to how he plays with young children but that doesn't mean we'd leave him alone with children.

Dog owners need to know how to be in control of their dogs, and unfortunately how to cater for absolute idiots and their dogs. We went to park a few weeks ago and 2 different dogs ran up to the aforementioned dog, one a black lab that was off lead and ran straight up, got right in his face and started growling. Milo stood tall but didn't even flinch as he was on lead and my brother commanded him to stay. The other dog then got closer so my brother pushed it away with his leg (not kicked, literally walked into it) and the owner looked like she was going to flip and didn't even try getting hold of her dog and just waited for it to walk away which it did after my brother shouted at it.

There are simply too many idiots out there, and not just the people who want a 'status dog' to look hard, there are a lot of people that just don't realise their dogs are capable of doing damage to both other dogs and people.

Re: Dogs : Sat Nov 09, 2013 7:11 pm  

the cal train wrote:

There are simply too many idiots out there, and not just the people who want a 'status dog' to look hard, there are a lot of people that just don't realise their dogs are capable of doing damage to both other dogs and people.

Exactly - Your post is a good one as it exposes the folly of the present system for dog ownership.

Your brother sounds like a good 'dogowner', while the other person you mention sounds like the absolute opposite, yet it is as easy for either to get hold of a dog.... The problem is that in this country, we see the ownership of a dog as almost a right, in the same way that Americans see gun ownership similarly.

In the same way that many sensible observers see a shake up to the gun ownership laws in the US as an absolute must, then, in this country, we need similar concerning the owning and purchasing of dogs.

Re: Dogs : Sat Nov 09, 2013 7:38 pm  

Dita's Slot Meter wrote:

Exactly - Your post is a good one as it exposes the folly of the present system for dog ownership.

Your brother sounds like a good 'dogowner', while the other person you mention sounds like the absolute opposite, yet it is as easy for either to get hold of a dog.... The problem is that in this country, we see the ownership of a dog as almost a right, in the same way that Americans see gun ownership similarly.

In the same way that many sensible observers see a shake up to the gun ownership laws in the US as an absolute must, then, in this country, we need similar concerning the owning and purchasing of dogs.

I've said it before, to own a dog imo you should be able to demonstrate some behavioural awareness and attend at least 6-8 weeks of training classes. A dog can't hold a conversation with you so its upto the owners to learn exactly what their dog is saying/feeling/behaving by observing and learning its body language. I'm fascinated by dog behaviour so I tend to read up on as much as I can and apply it to my two, but every owner should read at least one book before they even think of getting a dog. I'm (surprisingly) not sure about gun licensing in the US but I would assume anyone sensible wouldn't think of owning a gun without having some sort of training first at a shooting range, likewise my driving instructor taught me the rudimentaries of how an engine works as he saw it as an important piece of knowledge to have if I owned a car.

The unspoken good dog ettiquette as well is, if you see a dog on a lead and yours is off lead, you put yours on lead too because you never know why that dog is on a lead, it may be for a simple reason as recall but you never know until you approach and talk to the owners. Unfortunately not everyone is aware of this unspoken etiquette but even so, it should be good manners anyway.

Will it ever happen? I doubt it as some people see dogs as their right and couldn't care less to find out about what makes it tick. I see my dogs as a priviledge not a right as I would hope most good dog owners would. They give me so much that I think I owe it to them to understand them as much as I can.

Re: Dogs : Sat Nov 09, 2013 8:39 pm  

Dita's Slot Meter wrote:

Exactly - Your post is a good one as it exposes the folly of the present system for dog ownership.

Your brother sounds like a good 'dogowner', while the other person you mention sounds like the absolute opposite, yet it is as easy for either to get hold of a dog.... The problem is that in this country, we see the ownership of a dog as almost a right, in the same way that Americans see gun ownership similarly.

In the same way that many sensible observers see a shake up to the gun ownership laws in the US as an absolute must, then, in this country, we need similar concerning the owning and purchasing of dogs.

the funny thing is my brother is a 21 year old, with a rottweiler and labweiler, who also drives a hot hatchback. Looking at him you'd imagine he was your typical status dog owner/chav/daft lad, but he truly loves his dogs and is a very good owner. He never intended to keep Milo as his own, he was bought to live with his girlfriends mum as a bit of security after her husband and both rotties had all unfortunately passed in the space of a couple of years, but my brother became his master in a matter of days of knowing him and they're truly inseparable. My brother denies it now but when we were much younger he was terrified of any pet bigger than our guinea pigs

Re: Dogs : Sat Nov 09, 2013 11:57 pm  

Hull White Star wrote:

The unspoken good dog ettiquette as well is, if you see a dog on a lead and yours is off lead, you put yours on lead too because you never know why that dog is on a lead, it may be for a simple reason as recall but you never know until you approach and talk to the owners. Unfortunately not everyone is aware of this unspoken etiquette but even so, it should be good manners anyway.

Will it ever happen? I doubt it as some people see dogs as their right and couldn't care less to find out about what makes it tick. I see my dogs as a priviledge not a right as I would hope most good dog owners would. They give me so much that I think I owe it to them to understand them as much as I can.

If I put my dog ( bull/russel X, we think ) on his lead, he will happily take on a grizzly bear, off lead he is reasonably social with the occaisional raising of hackles and low growl if he feels threatened, so what is the better option?

All dogs are different, and require different behaviour, the important part is consistency , so the dog knows where he stands and what is expected of him , similarily when younger he would throw himself on his back at the sight of a child offering his belly for ticking, but would I leave him alone with a young child ( despite him not being big enough to do any real damage ) ? , no

The death of the young girl is a tradegy, but to introduce an adult large bulldog type of animal into a family with young children is not the cleverest thing to do

Re: Dogs : Sun Nov 10, 2013 6:41 am  

Starbug wrote:

If I put my dog ( bull/russel X, we think ) on his lead, he will happily take on a grizzly bear, off lead he is reasonably social with the occaisional raising of hackles and low growl if he feels threatened, so what is the better option?

That happens with many dogs, its a natural defence mechanism from feeling restricted on a lead, as I mentioned before a dog has only two mechanisms to deal with a perceived threat (not the same as what we'd see as a threat), to run away/show submission or to fight - they can do neither properly when tied to you. Mix in the fact that the dog also wants to protect you and you start to understand why many dogs can be more aggressive on the lead than off.

My own does not walk well on the lead as he pulls like hell because he always wants to be out in front - you can see this when you let him off the lead in open space, he then trots off 20 yards in front of you and will happily stay there all day, turning to check you every 30 seconds or so, part of that is a breed specific thing because GSD's have a trot that they can maintain all day, unfortunately its slightly faster than human walking pace but its what he feels more comfortable doing and off the lead he is extremely relaxed and a very friendly dog.

Re: Dogs : Sun Nov 10, 2013 9:13 am  

Starbug wrote:

If I put my dog ( bull/russel X, we think ) on his lead, he will happily take on a grizzly bear, off lead he is reasonably social with the occaisional raising of hackles and low growl if he feels threatened, so what is the better option?

All dogs are different, and require different behaviour, the important part is consistency , so the dog knows where he stands and what is expected of him , similarily when younger he would throw himself on his back at the sight of a child offering his belly for ticking, but would I leave him alone with a young child ( despite him not being big enough to do any real damage ) ? , no

The death of the young girl is a tradegy, but to introduce an adult large bulldog type of animal into a family with young children is not the cleverest thing to do

The better option is that you have your dog on a lead and you are in full control of your dog. If your dog is off lead, approaches a dog that is not so good with other dogs and that dog bites your dog, who do you think was in the wrong? YOU are for not having your dog fully under control. Its irresponsible to let your off lead dog approach an on lead dog and its annoying when you are aware and in fully control of your dog and an off lead dog approaches and the owner does nothing.