Dog Attack Limerick

RasTa

everlast75 wrote: »

The dog was an Alaskan Malamute according to the dog warden, so anyone saying it was a husky is completely wrong.

I can honestly say I've never heard of that breed, googled it and the thing looks like a freaking lion size wise

iguana

everlast75 wrote: »

Jesus - its the word of a dog warden who deals with.. Yes you've guessed it - dogs everyday of his life.

Like I said. - it takes a more trained eye to notice the difference and I happen to think that this furthers his credibility.

The fact is you're position is that he doesn't know what breed is what because you disagree with whether they are good pets or not.

I disagree with his point, but clearly grasp that this does not alter his professional opinion on the breed.

I happen to think your linkage is highly illogical and we'll have to disagree on that.

First off, in my first post I specified that the warden said the dog was a malamute, that was before your post. Secondly I don't necessarily disbelieve him, I just don't take his word as fact. Thirdly the reason I feel disbelief at what he says is not that I disagree with his opinion on what makes a good pet, but that he has given that opinion as a fact. Someone who thinks his opinion is a fact is not someone who should automatically be believed when they make statements. I have met plenty of dog wardens in this country and a lot of them talk a huge amount of absolute bollocks. Being a dog warden does not require an expert knowledge of dogs, half of them barely even know the laws they enforce.

The guy is not a dog expert, his opinion of what the dog is, because that's what it is, is not a fact. He could be right, he could be wrong.

tonyangelino

The big issue here is greedy breeders selling dogs to unsuitable buyers. Is it any wonder the dog went mad if it was confined to a small area or not walked. This is the tip of the iceberg. People are buying these dogs on donedeal etc every day of the week off complete chancers. I should know as i encountered a few before i bought off a proper breeder who asked me questions and basically wanted the dog to go to a suitable home.
Always research a breed before you buy, then train the dog and above all exercise it.
Lets be thankful that kid is ok but it wont be the last.

Father Damo

Its a bit hard to definitely make out....but is that a gun tatooed on his neck? :pac:

justtaletuknow

i have seen the dog as i work with the ISPCA in clare and i have seen the dog it is a malamute and i agree that it is not the dogs fault and that any type of sled dog needs alot of physical and mental stimulation otherwise these attacks do occur at that the dog warden frankie is right these dogs are NOT suitible house pets for people who dont excersise them and anyone who is looking for a malamute should look into them because they have a high prey drive and they need the proper excersise to stay happy and know there place in the pack just saying

Jelly 292

Huskies are horrible dogs, and I say this as an animal lover. They have a terrible attitude and I think people only buy them because "they look cool".

You have no clue what you are talking about.

This is very simple, idiot buys image dog, locks working dog in garden since Christmas and said idiot lets child play unsupervised with dog. Guess what....


I have 2 Sibes and they are the softest dogs you would ever meet, but they need serious excersise. It is driving me mad the fact they have become the 'it' dog. I hate seeing Huskys around with people who have no clue, they are easy to spot.

Father Damo

141_Oscar_Mike wrote: »

Skip to 9:40 to claim your prize

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYLMqKC3NqY

I can see this community hero line being trotted out by his brief to try and get some portion of a future jail sentence suspended.:pac:

Dravokivich

Bullseye1 wrote: »

If its not the parents fault who's fault is it? They left the child unsupervised with a dog?

Erm... I said this before earlier but it seems not many people noticed. The first mention of the child being "unsupervised" is in post 5.

The article makes no reference to this. The only issue with how the dog was handled by the parents is that the mother did not react to the dog appropiately by pulling the child away, she should of hit the dog. But this is instinctive. Most people would not know how to react to a dog that is attacking. So that would be an unfortunate case of ignorance, more so than negligence.

However, I'm more than open to be shown something that suggests otherwise on this instance.

The King of Moo

Dravokivich wrote: »

Erm... I said this before earlier but it seems not many people noticed. The first mention of the child being "unsupervised" is in post 5.

The article makes no reference to this. The only issue with how the dog was handled by the parents is that the mother did not react to the dog appropiately by pulling the child away, she should of hit the dog. But this is instinctive. Most people would not know how to react to a dog that is attacking. So that would be an unfortunate case of ignorance, more so than negligence.

However, I'm more than open to be shown something that suggests otherwise on this instance.

There's no mention of whether or not the child was unsupervised or not in any of the online reports about the attack, but you'd have to assume either they were unsupervised or someone was with them and really just wasn't paying attention.
It's incredibly unlikely that a dog that's known this child for two years (I have to assume: there's no mention of when they got the dog in any of the reports) would just attack them out of the blue without the child provoking them somehow or the dog giving some clear warnings to the child to back off.

But it's always hard to get accurate accounts of dog attacks due to the shoddy reporting of them. From the emotive language ("mauled," "thrown around like a rag doll") to the factual inaccuracies (calling the dog in this case a husky, which would be even more worrying if the family thought it was a husky) it's hard to know what really happened.
Added to this, it's more likely that papers will go for the "BIG SCARY EVIL DOG" angle than a more nuanced analysis of the situation.

It just seems very unlikely to me that the dog is completely at fault here. I have a dog and a two-year old nephew who get on great together, but I'd never consider leaving them alone together for a second. I'm always with them when they're playing, and if he was annoying the dog, she'd always give him clear warning signs (in the past she's given little growls when he's squeezed her too hard and I've pulled him away) or just walk away. Even if she were to attack out of the blue, I'd be between them in an instant (and she's big).
Dogs instinctively know that infants are fragile creatures and will do their utmost to avoid causing any harm to them. A dog will only attack a toddler out of the blue, especially one they know, in the case of severe stress or mental trauma.

Dravokivich

The King of Moo wrote: »

Even if she were to attack out of the blue, I'd be between them in an instant (and she's big).

As I mentioned, the only issue we can clearly gather here is that the mother did not get in between the child and the dog. The mother pulling on the child while the dog has a hold the child will only cause more agression in the dog. The mothers actions themselves could have created the escalation. Not due to negligence, which is what you would consider leaving a child unspervised, but as a result of not knowing how to properly handle the dog.

The King of Moo

Dravokivich wrote: »

As I mentioned, the only issue we can clearly gather here is that the mother did not get in between the child and the dog. The mother pulling on the child while the dog has a hold the child will only cause more agression in the dog. The mothers actions themselves could have created the escalation. Not due to negligence, which is what you would consider leaving a child unspervised, but as a result of not knowing how to properly handle the dog.

Unfortunately I think either negligence or not knowing how to handle a dog, or a combination of both, was probably involved in this case to some extent.
The fact that the mother was pulling the child away (though I could put that down to an instinctive reaction) and the family had a malamute in such a small garden, and that it's being reported as being a husky, suggests that they didn't know much about dogs and their care.

But I'd never say they're definitely to blame as we don't have all the facts.
Unfortunately that's generally the case with reports of dog attacks. The standard of journalism is generally appalling, with reporters going for the easy "dog turns without warning and mauls toddler" angle, which just gets people riled up and worried about big dogs being around kids. But the reality is that very few dogs will attack a child unprovoked and without warning, and there's generally more factors involved in an attack, but papers always go for the sensational angle and the dogs get the blame.

This might very well have been an unprovoked, freak attack, but I think that's probably not what happened. The sad thing is we'll probably never know the whole circumstances because the papers love to print sensational stories about big dogs attacking young children, and people love to get riled up about them.

MadameGascar

Malamutes require a lot of work, as someone mentioned if they aren't getting the physical and mental stimulation they are bred for then they can turn nasty. Knowing how to be the boss is just as important. Every dog owner needs to know how to handle their animal properly, but especially when it comes to a breed like the husky.

Unfortunately what makes some breeds great pets can also be the same thing that makes them potentially more dangerous, the rottweiler and doberman can be a threat to outsiders simply because they are so purposefully protective of their owners and their children. Huskies are babes when taken care of properly, but judging by the viciousness of this attack I'd guess this one wasn't. In saying that I was half mauled when I was 5 by a cross breed that I'd been friends with since babyhood. It was completely unprovoked...she had probably just had enough of being ridden like a pony and having her ears put in pigtails.

Logical Fallacy

Dudess wrote: »

As in, look like they're in Alaska?

But seriously: think it all you like. I just think they're beautiful dogs. I've only encountered one, but he was a sweetie.

We had a Husky when I was younger, we rescued it from an Uncle who is a total cock and doesn't know how to treat an animal correctly. Never had a nicer, friendly dog.

It's about how you treat the animal for the most part, and a large ****ing slice of responsibility.

Father Damo wrote: »

Its a bit hard to definitely make out....but is that a gun tatooed on his neck?

Everyone in Carew Park has a gun tattoo sham.

up for anything

I haven't read the whole thread but has any reason been given as to why the dog didn't attack the mother too when she was trying to take the child from him? Surely if he was in attack dog mode he wouldn't fixate on a single person, he'd have attacked anybody in front of him?

The King of Moo

up for anything wrote: »

I haven't read the whole thread but has any reason been given as to why the dog didn't attack the mother too when she was trying to take the child from him? Surely if he was in attack dog mode he wouldn't fixate on a single person, he'd have attacked anybody in front of him?

I've just looked through all the news stories about it online and none of them mention that.

The only quotes are from the guy who stopped the dog and though he was brave to do that, I don't think he'd be the most objective witness because he was caught up in it. His father gave a quote too, actually.

From The Sun's report:

He explained: “The dog was throwing the child up into the air. The child was like a rag doll to the dog.

“The woman was trying to pull the child and the dog was pulling the child in the opposite way. I went in with the shovel and stopped it. I hit the dog.

“He backed off for a few seconds, but he went for him again, so I hit him again.”

The humble hero added: “I had to lock the door. Those dogs are bred for taking down bears. I went in not really thinking about the danger. I was just trying to get the lad safe.”

What!!??

Jonathan’s parents, Michael, 59, and Eileen, 61, said they were very proud of their son.

Michael said: “The woman’s pants was down from the dog dragging her around the place. They were covered in muck.

“The child had no clothes on him, the dog tore all the clothes completely off of him.

“He had the child in his mouth. Only for Jonathan, the boy was dead.”

While all the articles are pretty poor (every single one calls the dog a husky), The Sun's, unsusprisingly, really takes the biscuit.
In addition to the expected emotive, loaded language ("crazed mutt," "the cur," "the humble hero") they have a stock photo of what I'm fairly sure is a wolf baring its teeth with the caption "Vicious...husky" underneath (here).

Appalling stuff, but unfortunately that's the case with reports of dog attacks: even the more respectable papers are more concerned with sensational rabble-rousing stories than little things like accuracy.

stupidusername

Drav does make a good point though, but if you look at those comments on that page everybody else is assuming the child was unsupervised.

it's not a ****ing husky. talk about utter ****e journalism. teeny tot versus BIG MEAN DEVIL WOLF! RAWWWRR!

haminka

it's funny how you never met a person but you know they must be a total and complete moron.
I just read the article in The Sun.

stupidusername

haminka wrote: »

it's funny how you never met a person but you know they must be a total and complete moron.
I just read the article in The Sun.

And who are you assuming is a moron?

haminka

well, I don't mean the humble and brave hero, if that's what you are asking. I don't know the guy and with regards to the this particular story he saved the kid.

stupidusername

haminka wrote: »

well, I don't mean the humble and brave hero, if that's what you are asking. I don't know the guy and with regards to the this particular story he saved the kid.

I'm not asking if it's him, I'm asking who it is

haminka

I more or less meant the one who had a look at a snarling dog and saw a vicious husky.
edited to clarify : you can get that facial expression in any dog or wolf and it normally means back off. that's it. it doesn't mean that the dog is vicious. this is tabloid journalist style par excellence.

Discodog

justtaletuknow wrote: »

i have seen the dog as i work with the ISPCA in clare and i have seen the dog it is a malamute and i agree that it is not the dogs fault and that any type of sled dog needs alot of physical and mental stimulation otherwise these attacks do occur at that the dog warden frankie is right these dogs are NOT suitible house pets for people who dont excersise them and anyone who is looking for a malamute should look into them because they have a high prey drive and they need the proper excersise to stay happy and know there place in the pack just saying

If you know Frankie can you ask him to reply to my email forwarded via Conor ? It is absolute rubbish to make these comments about Northern breeds & incredibly ignorant. It would be bad enough from any dog warden but it is even worse coming from the ISPCA. Mind you the CEO of the same organisation referred to "worthless mongrels" & Mr Coote managed to kill over 200 Greyhounds in 2010 & not rehome a single one. If the dog is a Malamute then there is a strain in Ireland that suffer from epilepsy. The breeders ignore this & carry on breeding.

http://www.environ.ie/en/LocalGovernment/DogControl/

Dog Wardens & Pound keepers are totally unqualified. It should be mandatory for anyone employed in these professions to have a dog behaviour qualification. Any expert knows that a six month puppy doesn't just attack & no dog bites without a good reason. By just killing the dog you prevent any analysis of why the "attack" took place & how to prevent such incidents in the future.

Frankie & the ISPCA in general should focus on the irresponsible ownership in allowing a child to be unsupervised with any dog irrespective of breed. I don't have kids but I have three dogs, all different breeds, that are fine with kids because they have been properly socialised. I would totally trust the dogs with children but I wouldn't trust the kids & I would never leave them together unsupervised.

By the way Frankie will be discussing this on Clare FM 10.45am Tuesday. Maybe he will suggest that Northern's should be put on the restricted breed list :rolleyes:

There are too many ignorant comments in this thread to address them all. I am often discussing animal welfare with people in other countries. They all ask why Ireland is so bad - we are now pretty much the worst in Europe. I just let them read threads like this.

armitage_skanks

Discodog wrote: »

Any expert knows that a six month puppy doesn't just attack & no dog bites without a good reason.

You can't apply human psychology to a dog.

Deep down all dogs are wild animals. You can domesticate them and train them but there is always a degree of unpredictability. Show me someone who says their dog obeys their commands 100% of the time and has never ever displayed any animalistic tendencies and i'll show you a liar or an idiot.

To say that no dog bites without reason is a kick in the face to anybody who has ever been savaged or disfigured by a dog. It's a dog, there is no advanced reasoning going on in its brain.

Discodog

armitage_skanks wrote: »

You can't apply human psychology to a dog.

Deep down all dogs are wild animals. You can domesticate them and train them but there is always a degree of unpredictability. Show me someone who says their dog obeys their commands 100% of the time and has never ever displayed any animalistic tendencies and i'll show you a liar or an idiot.

To say that no dog bites without reason is a kick in the face to anybody who has ever been savaged or disfigured by a dog. It's a dog, there is no advanced reasoning going on in its brain.

I am not. I am applying animal psychology. If you do just a little research you will see that dogs never attack without reason. Professor Bradshaw at Bristol University has studied dogs for over 20 years - read his book "In Defence of Dogs."

There is actually masses of in depth reasoning & it goes right back to the evolution of dogs. Wild dogs such as Wolves are not aggressive because aggression risks injury & that is bad for the pack as a whole. Dogs will nearly always give warning signs but we ignore them. Every child will encounter dogs yet we give kids no training in how to interact with dogs or how to understand dog language. A recent study revealed that when school children were shown a photo of a dog snarling they thought is was laughing !

Would you blame the two year old child if it did something wrong or would you blame the parents ? The same applies to the dog who relies on it's owner to teach it how to interact. In these cases, in Ireland, it is easier to blame the dog than to seek the real reason. I believe that a woman was jailed in the UK for allowing a child to be unsupervised with the dog that attacked it - that won't happen here.

rorrissey

Not the dog's fault, not the child's fault, the parents' fault. You don't leave a two year old child alone with a dog, especially if it's a 6 month old unexercised sled dog who's been banished in the back yard. In fact, you aren't supposed to buy a siberian husky or a malamute if you're not going to exercise it correctly. But there are so many of them around these days, a lot of them left over in pounds/shelters after Chirstmas. Dogs don't attack without reason, the child's play probably got a bit too rough for the dog to handle. The child may have even poked the dogs eye or yanked his tail too hard. In my opinion, this is a case of both animal and child neglect. I mean, did the parents honestly think it was fine to leave them both alone together?! :mad:

Discodog

rorrissey wrote: »

In fact, you aren't supposed to buy a siberian husky or a malamute if you're not going to exercise it correctly. :mad:

I agree with your post but this bit applies to any breed. Too many people assume that being shut in the garden equals exercise. Every dog needs two walks per day.

DamagedTrax

unfortunatly 'husky type' dogs are becoming the new fashion accesory for the discerning wannabe gangster around my area. little tough guys walking their dogs for at most 20 minutes a day. is it any wonder these incidents are starting to happen.

there's one in particular in my area, runs off the lead all the time. i was out walking my SBT yesterday and it came bounding over. cue shouts from scumbag owner "keep your dog back, he'll go for her" :eek: ... 2 seconds later the pup was on its back being totally submissive to my bitch. unfortunatly with this owner it may not turn out to be such a playful dog when it matures.

but it goes to show its all about the owner. why was his husky off lead if it 'goes for' other dogs? why the hell should i keep my dog back? if the truth be told she's not shy about letting other dogs know their place. not that she'd ever start aggro, she just doesnt tolerate it when put up to her.

also totally agree with the intelligent comments in this thread. leave any breed unsupervised with a kid and you're asking for trouble. beggars belief really

hatrickpatrick

2ndcoming wrote: »

Cue a load of animal rights nuts wondering why they don't put down all the people involved for distressing the poor dog so much he had to attack a two-year-old.

I wouldn't o that far of course, but you must admit that an automatic death sentence for a dog's first violent offense when humans in vicious gangs often get a suspended sentence if anything is a bit messed up.

And just FYI - I'm not suggesting we should lighten up on the dogs in the above remark.

Discodog

Interesting comparison. A "husky" injures a child here & we immediately kill the dog. A husky kills a child in the USA & the focus shifts to why it did it & whether it needs to be killed.

http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2012/04/05/dog-expert-testifies-during-hearing-in-mckeesport-husky-case/

King of Kings

rorrissey wrote: »

Not the dog's fault, not the child's fault, the parents' fault. You don't leave a two year old child alone with a dog, especially if it's a 6 month old unexercised sled dog who's been banished in the back yard. In fact, you aren't supposed to buy a siberian husky or a malamute if you're not going to exercise it correctly. But there are so many of them around these days, a lot of them left over in pounds/shelters after Chirstmas. Dogs don't attack without reason, the child's play probably got a bit too rough for the dog to handle. The child may have even poked the dogs eye or yanked his tail too hard. In my opinion, this is a case of both animal and child neglect. I mean, did the parents honestly think it was fine to leave them both alone together?! :mad:

where the **** did it say the child was unsupervised?

Further to this the concensus here being that you must never leave a child unsupervised leads me to two conclusions:

1. most of the people here are spouting utter tripe. cos anybody with kids would know that you cannot supervise them all the time.

so point number 2.

2. it follows that families with young kids shouldn't keep a dog according the the wise folk here. Given as a father of two I know what i'm talking about regarding supervision of children.


I'd wonder about the mentality and life experience of some of the knowledgable ones here.

steddyeddy

Discodog wrote: »

If you know Frankie can you ask him to reply to my email forwarded via Conor ? It is absolute rubbish to make these comments about Northern breeds & incredibly ignorant. It would be bad enough from any dog warden but it is even worse coming from the ISPCA. Mind you the CEO of the same organisation referred to "worthless mongrels" & Mr Coote managed to kill over 200 Greyhounds in 2010 & not rehome a single one. If the dog is a Malamute then there is a strain in Ireland that suffer from epilepsy. The breeders ignore this & carry on breeding.

http://www.environ.ie/en/LocalGovernment/DogControl/

Dog Wardens & Pound keepers are totally unqualified. It should be mandatory for anyone employed in these professions to have a dog behaviour qualification. Any expert knows that a six month puppy doesn't just attack & no dog bites without a good reason. By just killing the dog you prevent any analysis of why the "attack" took place & how to prevent such incidents in the future.

Frankie & the ISPCA in general should focus on the irresponsible ownership in allowing a child to be unsupervised with any dog irrespective of breed. I don't have kids but I have three dogs, all different breeds, that are fine with kids because they have been properly socialised. I would totally trust the dogs with children but I wouldn't trust the kids & I would never leave them together unsupervised.

By the way Frankie will be discussing this on Clare FM 10.45am Tuesday. Maybe he will suggest that Northern's should be put on the restricted breed list :rolleyes:

There are too many ignorant comments in this thread to address them all. I am often discussing animal welfare with people in other countries. They all ask why Ireland is so bad - we are now pretty much the worst in Europe. I just let them read threads like this.

First off I agree with a lot of your comments about greyhounds and the ispca's attitude to them also your comments about excessive breeding. I have to ask though you just panned his comments without offering a rebuttal as to why their absolute rubbish.

It is absolute rubbish to make these comments about Northern breeds & incredibly ignorant.

His comments where as follows

these dogs are NOT suitible house pets for people who dont excersise them and anyone who is looking for a malamute should look into them because they have a high prey drive and they need the proper excersise to stay happy

Now playing devils advocate here but I dont see how a dog bred for sled work wouldnt have a genotype that conveys the dog with a high level of energy. How would such a dog not require more exercise than average? It would go against what we know of selective breeding to think that the dog is no different to any other breed.

later12

I think people should be very wary of the warning signs.

We have lots of dogs at home, and it isn't hard to spot the ones who are patient with nieces and nephews and the ones who cannot be trusted with nieces and nephews. It's also easy to spot the [mostly nephews] who cannot be trusted around dogs, for that matter.

So I find it hard to believe that the parents might not have seen this coming. Did this really come totally out of the blue? The dog just woke up one day and decided to lash out in a way that he had never done before? I think that may be a little unlikely, and I would question the wisdom of the parents in leaving the child alone with this dog, who would have been quite a strong animal by canine standards.

Bullseye1

Nonsense. When a child is this young it's your responsibility as a parent to supervise them. It you don't your negligent. As they get older you allow them more freedom but it's always on your terms as the parent.

If you lived near a river or the sea would you leave your child in this instance an infant unattended?

King of Kings wrote: »

where the **** did it say the child was unsupervised?

Further to this the concensus here being that you must never leave a child unsupervised leads me to two conclusions:

1. most of the people here are spouting utter tripe. cos anybody with kids would know that you cannot supervise them all the time.

so point number 2.

2. it follows that families with young kids shouldn't keep a dog according the the wise folk here. Given as a father of two I know what i'm talking about regarding supervision of children.


I'd wonder about the mentality and life experience of some of the knowledgable ones here.

justtaletuknow

Discodog wrote: »

Dog Wardens & Pound keepers are totally unqualified. It should be mandatory for anyone employed in these professions to have a dog behaviour qualification. Any expert knows that a six month puppy doesn't just attack & no dog bites without a good reason. By just killing the dog you prevent any analysis of why the "attack" took place & how to prevent such incidents in the future.

i have to dissagree with your statment there i have an 8 month dog who got attacked when i was walking through a forest my dog did nothing and the dog that attacked him he had deep puncture wounds and was in an emense amount of physical pain the attacking dog was only a 7 month old shepard cross ....... dogs act on impulse they ARE NOT HUMANS they have completely different morals then humans
:rolleyes:

Discodog

steddyeddy wrote: »

His comments where as follows

They were the comments posted here & not made directly from the Warden. By the way the "place in pack" bit was discredited years ago.

justtaletuknow wrote: »

frankie is right these dogs are NOT suitible house pets for people who dont excersise them and anyone who is looking for a malamute should look into them because they have a high prey drive and they need the proper excersise to stay happy and know there place in the pack just saying

On Clare FM he said that malamutes are dangerous, and that huskies shouldn't be pets. This is totally untrue. Yes different breeds may need varying amounts of exercise but all breeds need regular exercise. There is no evidence that a lack of exercise will make any dog become aggressive. But a lack of proper human interaction & socialisation can make a dog more unstable.

Plenty of people with children own Huskies & Malamutes without any problem & children get bitten by Labradors - it has nothing to do with breed.

By the way I can't link to the Clare FM comments. I have asked them & they do not have a copy.

justtaletuknow

Discodog wrote: »

They were the comments posted here & not made directly from the Warden. By the way the "place in pack" bit was discredited years ago.



On Clare FM he said that malamutes are dangerous, and that huskies shouldn't be pets. This is totally untrue. Yes different breeds may need varying amounts of exercise but all breeds need regular exercise. There is no evidence that a lack of exercise will make any dog become aggressive. But a lack of proper human interaction & socialisation can make a dog more unstable.

Plenty of people with children own Huskies & Malamutes without any problem & children get bitten by Labradors - it has nothing to do with breed.

By the way I can't link to the Clare FM comments. I have asked them & they do not have a copy.

Any trainer will tell you that lack of excersice will cause a dog to have behavioural problems

Discodog

justtaletuknow wrote: »

i have to dissagree with your statment there i have an 8 month dog who got attacked when i was walking through a forest my dog did nothing and the dog that attacked him he had deep puncture wounds and was in an emense amount of physical pain the attacking dog was only a 7 month old shepard cross ....... dogs act on impulse they ARE NOT HUMANS they have completely different morals then humans
:rolleyes:

Dogs don't have morals - that's a human trait. Dogs exhibit behaviour & that behaviour has nothing to do with their age or breed. I have been with & worked with dogs for over 25 years & in my experience it would be extremely unusual for a six month old dog to be aggressive.

The dog that attacked your dog had a reason for doing it. Just because you don't know why it happened doesn't mean that it was a random impulse.

You stated in an earlier post that you work with the ISPCA in Clare which is admirable - I did many years with the RSPCA. Believe me it will make your job 1000 times easier if you read & learn about canine behaviour.

Hopefully Frankie will clarify his comments on Tuesday & not describe any breed as dangerous. The ISPCA know that this is a silly comment.

justtaletuknow wrote: »

Any trainer will tell you that lack of excersice will cause a dog to have behavioural problems

Many trainers don't have a clue & few are properly qualified but I didn't say that a lack of exercise can't cause behavioural problems for example destructive behaviour, chewing etc. I said that it wouldn't be a reason for aggression unless it was an extreme lack of exercise.

Personally I hate finding reasons to be critical of the ISPCA. I desperately want them to be successful but why are they even involved in running Dog Pounds ? Their kill rate is above average compared to the other Pounds.

justtaletuknow

Discodog wrote: »

Dogs don't have morals - that's a human trait. Dogs exhibit behaviour & that behaviour has nothing to do with their age or breed. I have been with & worked with dogs for over 25 years & in my experience it would be extremely unusual for a six month old dog to be aggressive.

The dog that attacked your dog had a reason for doing it. Just because you don't know why it happened doesn't mean that it was a random impulse.

You stated in an earlier post that you work with the ISPCA in Clare which is admirable - I did many years with the RSPCA. Believe me it will make your job 1000 times easier if you read & learn about canine behaviour.

Hopefully Frankie will clarify his comments on Tuesday & not describe any breed as dangerous. The ISPCA know that this is a silly comment.



Many trainers don't have a clue & few are properly qualified but I didn't say that a lack of exercise can't cause behavioural problems for example destructive behaviour, chewing etc. I said that it wouldn't be a reason for aggression unless it was an extreme lack of exercise.

Personally I hate finding reasons to be critical of the ISPCA. I desperately want them to be successful but why are they even involved in running Dog Pounds ? Their kill rate is above average compared to the other Pounds.

i agree with u about the trainers as iv had a bad experiance with one and i think we are just clashing in opinion not fact ........ i have look up learned and studied about canine behaviour but i find the stuff you look up can be very biast and just a matter of opinion... and i know dogs act on impulse as my own dog is the most imulsive creeper going but the attack was uncalled for as my fella who is neutered was walking beside me on his lead and boom dog comes out of nowwhere and attacks him.... so is that aggression or impulsivness because hackles up teeth bearing with blood pumping out of my wee-chons neck didnt seem like what a young pup should do in my opinion but it happens...

LH Pathe

suicide_circus wrote: »

Fair play to the chap, he does look like the sort of guy who would like hitting things with a shovel.

still, some neck. Comparable to Professor Green

unfair that I can guage he is a zero with a suspiciously weak immune system for such a young man.. that went to hero; with one fell swoop of a shovel. Can someone present me such an opportunity?!! erk.. pass.

Discodog

justtaletuknow wrote: »

but the attack was uncalled for as my fella who is neutered was walking beside me on his lead and boom dog comes out of nowwhere and attacks him.... so is that aggression or impulsivness

It may of been uncalled for but it happened for a reason. You don't know the history of the dog & what influenced it's decision to attack your dog.

We are disagreeing over a fundamental point. Mr Coote stated that one particular breed was dangerous. The ISPCA should be totally opposed to breed specific legislation as is the RSPCA, Kennel Clubs, Vets etc. He is very wrong & I hope that he issues a correction.

The ISPCA have already alienated & upset Mongrel owners, Greyhound owners & now they have added Northern breed owners to the list. This is not a good idea for an organisation that relies on donations. Even worse they killed 1743 dogs in 2010. The ISPCA is there to prevent cruelty & not to kill dogs.

Dogsbody3000

This is a tragic incident and my symathies go out to the family involved. I hope the child makes a full recovery and is not emotionally or physically scarred for life.

Some of the posts on this thread give me cause for concern, however, and I have been compelled to post.

First of all, dogs are predators. It doesn't matter the breed, they all can, will and enjoy - if allowed - hunting and killing. There is nothing wrong with that. It is their nature. They are not moral creatures, they don't do things for 'good' or 'bad' reasons. Morals are human concepts. Dogs do things that work - whether it is something that brings them pleasure or protects them from pain. I know that is overly symplistic, but it is what all animal behaviour (even human) boils down to at its most basic.

Because dogs are predators, they have a mouth full of pretty impressive weapons. All dogs have them, but of course big dogs are stronger and have bigger teeth so are able to do more damage. Dogs use their teeth for so many things - eating, playing, grooming, communicating and yes, biting. They are the tools they have, what do we expect them to do with them?

All dog attacks have a cause, but just like many things in life, it is often impossible to discover the cause.

From the very brief information of the attack, it sounds to me like the dog was in prey mode. He ripped the toddlers clothes off, tossed him in the air, didn't turn on the man or the woman trying to save the child, and apparently pulled down the woman's trousers in his effort to get the child back. Have you ever seen a dog playing tug? Or ripping up tissue paper or running after a ball? They are play behaviours but all are practice for hunting and killing. The woman pulling at the child would only strengthen the dog's desire to play with the boy and think that she was joining in on the game. Also, toddlers are small, make high pitched sounds and move irratically - like prey animals. Perfect for inciting a possibly underexercised, bored young dog.

Also, what kind of bite inhibition did this dog have? Had his owners worked on teaching him that it is never ok to put your teeth on a human being? Had he been discouraged or encouraged to play bite or play rough with his owners? A lot of people think it is ok to let their dog jump up and nip at their arms and hands because they think it is in play, but if you let your dog wrestle with you,an adult, and play like a dog, how can you then punish him if he thinks it is ok to wrestle and play with your child in the same way?

Also there needs to be better education about how to behave around dogs. People still think a wagging tail is a sign of friendship. It is not. It is a communication, but the communication could be please don't approach, I'm scared or I'm ready to attack. Unhappy, stressed and aggressive dogs often move slowly, are still and quiet. People often see these as signs of calmness and friendliness and are surprised when the dog turns and bites them.

Dogs are a different species. They are not humans. We have to teach them how to behave appropriately in our world and we have to learn about them so that both dogs and people are safe around us.

If your toddler was injured in a car crash would you call for a ban on all cars? Should only small cars that go slowly be allowed, because you are less likely to be seriously injured in an accident in a vechile going below 20mph? Surely we should educate people to be better dog owners (drivers) so there are less accidents, teach dogs the rules so we have better safety measures in place and give children the canine green cross code so that they know how to react around dogs, especially if they do meet an aggressive animal.

Battered Mars Bar

Obviously can't use a shovel if the dog came back three times.

ScumLord

Discodog wrote: »

On Clare FM he said that malamutes are dangerous, and that huskies shouldn't be pets. This is totally untrue. Yes different breeds may need varying amounts of exercise but all breeds need regular exercise. There is no evidence that a lack of exercise will make any dog become aggressive. But a lack of proper human interaction & socialisation can make a dog more unstable.

Maybe if it's not part of their daily routine they won't miss exercise but My brother in laws dog (German weimaraner) goes stir crazy if he doesn't get out for a run daily and he needs quite a big run.

Lack of exercise may not be the route cause (it's certainly mental abuse/neglect that makes a dangerous dog) but I think it contributes.

Dogsbody3000 wrote: »

Dogs are a different species. They are not humans. We have to teach them how to behave appropriately in our world and we have to learn about them so that both dogs and people are safe around us.

You could almost say the same thing about human children, they're not born civilised and with an innate modern sociability you have to teach them how to be an sociable adult.

Dogs do have a disadvantage in that we've spent thousands of years breeding them to be a particular way and now we've changed the rules completely in a very short period of time. They always had important roles which are now gone for the most part. They have however adapted to understanding humans, they are probably better at thinking like humans than just about any other animal on the planet, it takes a special level of abuse and neglect to mess them up.

Discodog

Discodog wrote: »

The ISPCA have already alienated & upset Mongrel owners, Greyhound owners & now they have added Northern breed owners to the list. This is not a good idea for an organisation that relies on donations. Even worse they killed 1743 dogs in 2010. The ISPCA is there to prevent cruelty & not to kill dogs.

I have now had my first complaint about my dog because of this. Just because he is a Husky. I am going to make a complaint to the ISPCA about this.

CruelCoin

Discodog wrote: »

They were the comments posted here & not made directly from the Warden. By the way the "place in pack" bit was discredited years ago.



On Clare FM he said that malamutes are dangerous, and that huskies shouldn't be pets. This is totally untrue. Yes different breeds may need varying amounts of exercise but all breeds need regular exercise. There is no evidence that a lack of exercise will make any dog become aggressive. But a lack of proper human interaction & socialisation can make a dog more unstable.

Plenty of people with children own Huskies & Malamutes without any problem & children get bitten by Labradors - it has nothing to do with breed.

By the way I can't link to the Clare FM comments. I have asked them & they do not have a copy.

Certain breeds (rotweiler, doberman, german shepard, etc) are specifically bred for aggression. These have no place as pets, and no amount of exercise is going to take the inbuilt predatory instinct out of these beasts.

A dog that did it once will do it again given the chance. Absolutely right to destroy it.

CruelCoin

Discodog wrote: »

The ISPCA have already alienated & upset Mongrel owners, Greyhound owners & now they have added Northern breed owners to the list. This is not a good idea for an organisation that relies on donations. Even worse they killed 1743 dogs in 2010. The ISPCA is there to prevent cruelty & not to kill dogs.

You fail to mention that these dogs had all been seized from abusive homes, and then and only then, destroyed after nobody was willing to take them home.

They don't have unlimited resources to keep them fed forever. At some point they have to say enough is enough, it cruel to keep you in a 3ft x 3ft pen the rest of your life....

OldNotWIse

davet82 wrote: »

only if its stuffed

I agree. A stuffed child will be less likely to torment the dog

OldNotWIse

CruelCoin wrote: »

Certain breeds (rotweiler, doberman, german shepard, etc) are specifically bred for aggression. These have no place as pets, and no amount of exercise is going to take the inbuilt predatory instinct out of these beasts.

A dog that did it once will do it again given the chance. Absolutely right to destroy it.

"Bred for aggression" - You cannot breed aggression into a dog. It's learned behaviour. The bad reps are more to do with the types of owners these dogs tended to have in the past, hence the bad name.

Beasts lol

ScumLord

CruelCoin wrote: »

Certain breeds (rotweiler, doberman, german shepard, etc) are specifically bred for aggression. These have no place as pets, and no amount of exercise is going to take the inbuilt predatory instinct out of these beasts.

A dog that did it once will do it again given the chance. Absolutely right to destroy it.

This is alarmist nonsense. The German Shepard as it's name would suggest was breed for farm work and herding but they did will in protection work because they took commands well. Aggressive dogs are no good to anyone because you can't control them, all dogs that work in security and protection are very obedient and loyal which is the trait that breeders look for.

Andy!!

OldNotWIse wrote: »

"Bred for aggression" - You cannot breed aggression into a dog. It's learned behaviour. The bad reps are more to do with the types of owners these dogs tended to have in the past, hence the bad name.

Beasts lol

so... the fact that lions are more aggresive than cats isn't down to their genes, it's down to learned behaviour? lol. Got any links to articles that substanciate that?