Siberian Huskies banned from Shankill dog park?

boopadoopadoop

I was out for a walk with my 7 month old Siberian Husky and met a woman who owned a Malamute-cross. We let our dogs run about and play whilst we had a conversation.

During the conversation I mentioned that I had planned on checking out the dog park in Shankill, Co. Dublin, as despite years of owning dogs, I have never been to one! She told me that Siberian Huskies are banned from Shankill dog park due to some instances involving aggression and fights.

Can anyone confirm this? If it is true then that is just ludicrous! Any dog can be aggressive! Any dog can have behaviour issues but its usually their owner's fault, not the breed itself! The way a dog behaves is a reflection of their owner and how they have been raised - socialization skills, obedience, training and manners. My husky is in no way aggressive. He has come across a lot of dogs of all different breeds who have been nothing but aggressive toward him, but he has never fought back or provoked it.

To ban an entire breed from a dog park is idiotic. What are they going to do if some German Shepherds act up or if a Chihuahua has some behaviour issues? - ban those breeds too? :mad:

I am sorry for the rant!

kylith

Restricted breeds are, AFAIK, already banned from dog parks. Since they can't be allowed off-lead there's no point in bringing them to one anyway.

Unfortunately I've recently started to fear that Sibes and Mals are the next dogs to be put on the RB list. I've been seeing more and more of them being walked by (read: dragging around) the type of people I wouldn't trust to own a hamster.

ISDW

I think you'll find that GSDs would be banned, as they are on the Restricted Breed list, most dog parks won't allow any RB dogs into dog parks - stupid rule.

Just one thing though, if you're letting your sibe off lead to play, I'd really advise you to stop, whilst a pup, your dog may well come back, but in a couple of months, the prey drive will probably kick in, and you could lose your dog.

boopadoopadoop

That is ridiculous!

I can have my Husky off lead and can call him back to me if needs be. The idea that the breed cannot be trusted off-lead is ignorant. I have been around Huskies and Malamutes for years, have trained a few on and off lead including my own right now. They are stubborn but it just takes more time, patience and persistence than some other dog breeds.

ISDW

boopadoopadoop wrote: »

That is ridiculous!

I can have my Husky off lead and can call him back to me if needs be. The idea that the breed cannot be trusted off-lead is ignorant. I have been around Huskies and Malamutes for years, have trained a few on and off lead including my own right now. They are stubborn but it just takes more time, patience and persistence than some other dog breeds.

Thank you so much for your kind words. Apologies, you are obviously an expert, and know more than every single breed club and breed welfare organisation in the world.

I genuinely hope that your dog doesn't pay the price.

boopadoopadoop

Did I say that? - no.

What I am saying though is that I know my dog. I have experience with the breed. The fact that I can and have trained them on and off lead is not the subject here. If you want to play 'keyboard warriors' then please go on a different thread.

I am trying to find more information about this supposed ban on Siberian Huskies in Shankill dog park.

ISDW

Perhaps you should contact the council that runs the park, who can give you the correct information? Seems to me that would be the quickest and most efficient way to find out if something is true or not.

Again, my apologies, I was merely trying to offer some advice, as I have a little bit of experience of huskies as well. in fact my dogs will turn left and right on a single word, go past turns and obstacles by vocal commands, sit and lie down on hand signals, but I am not arrogant enough to ignore breed traits, so respect the breed I love so much and keep them safe. My dogs are also trained to recall of course, it would be stupid not to, as accidents do happen. As for being a keyboard warrior? I walk the walk, having taken in literally hundreds of huskies that have ended up in pounds around the country, mostly down to their breed traits and owners being unable to keep them safe. I have not insulted you at all in this thread, merely offered some advice, as well as answering your initial post. it is a shame you have not extended me the same courtesy.

Whispered

boopadoopadoop wrote: »

That is ridiculous!

I can have my Husky off lead and can call him back to me if needs be. The idea that the breed cannot be trusted off-lead is ignorant. I have been around Huskies and Malamutes for years, have trained a few on and off lead including my own right now. They are stubborn but it just takes more time, patience and persistence than some other dog breeds.

God ISDW could you not have done your research before posting on something you are ignorant about :pac:

OP, I too think that sibes might be next on the RB list unfortunately. Back yard breeders selling to all and sundry and people not understanding the needs of the dogs before getting them are leading to more and more incidents involving them. Hopefully it will get better.

RB dogs are not allowed off lead in public areas, so wouldn't be in a dog park anyway.

magicherbs

how is any of this actually implemented.

if you have your Husky /malamute there and they say sorry on huskies allowed why don't you say it's not a husky it's a samoyed / gsd mix or something. tell them to prove it.

boopadoopadoop

ISDW wrote: »

Perhaps you should contact the council that runs the park, who can give you the correct information? Seems to me that would be the quickest and most efficient way to find out if something is true or not.

Again, my apologies, I was merely trying to offer some advice, as I have a little bit of experience of huskies as well. in fact my dogs will turn left and right on a single word, go past turns and obstacles by vocal commands, sit and lie down on hand signals, but I am not arrogant enough to ignore breed traits, so respect the breed I love so much and keep them safe. My dogs are also trained to recall of course, it would be stupid not to, as accidents do happen. As for being a keyboard warrior? I walk the walk, having taken in literally hundreds of huskies that have ended up in pounds around the country, mostly down to their breed traits and owners being unable to keep them safe. I have not insulted you at all in this thread, merely offered some advice, as well as answering your initial post. it is a shame you have not extended me the same courtesy.

I think you're quite rude to be honest. You know nothing about me nor my experience with the breed. You are not the only one who has taken in the breed. I have worked in rescue centers, have been involved in rehoming these dogs in both Ireland and the UK. I have personally owned Sibes and Malamutes all my life and each dog has been trained to a standard where they are suitable off-lead. I am not "arrogant" with the breed traits. I understand the traits and work around them to achieve my goals in training. Your sarcastic comments have been offensive to say the least. I am grateful for your reply regarding the dog park scenario but would appreciate it if you do not further this debate.

boopadoopadoop

boopadoopadoop wrote: »

That is ridiculous!

I can have my Husky off lead and can call him back to me if needs be. The idea that the breed cannot be trusted off-lead is ignorant.

I wouldnt say ignorant. Huskies are well known for running. I know somebody who said they have a Husky and a cat and its hogwash that they cant be together, after 5 years of being together the Husky killed the cat.

As for dog parks and Huskys i would hate to see Huskys get a bad name due to irresponsible dog wardens who obviously cant do their job properly.

boopadoopadoop

"i would hate to see Huskys get a bad name due to irresponsible dog wardens who obviously cant do their job properly"

I completely agree with this.

Synyster Shadow

I had an Alaskan malamute and he was afraid of his own shadow he was off lead just about everywhere like forest and farms and I never had any problem with him I think it should be assessment on that particular dog not its breed. Iv always had a RB and they never live up to what they should be.

ISDW

Synyster Shadow wrote: »

I had an Alaskan malamute and he was afraid of his own shadow he was off lead just about everywhere like forest and farms and I never had any problem with him I think it should be assessment on that particular dog not its breed. Iv always had a RB and they never live up to what they should be.

I never mentioned malamutes

fatmammycat

There has been a lean towards banning husky and malamutes from dog parks in recent years and even putting them on the restricted list, especially since the media hoopla of last year. A friend of mine gets terrible abuse when walking her perfectly friendly sibe in the local dog walkers 'zone' ( it's not a dog park per se). I genuinely wouldn't be at all shocked it they were next on the breed specific list. It's utter nonsense of course, but the same nonsense owners of RB dogs have been putting up with for some time. Wait 'til you see, boxers, huskies and great danes or some other larger than a twenty-kilo dog dog will be next.

**Vai**

What does ISDW stand for again? Irish Society of Dog Walkers?

I didnt realise RBs were a dog park no-no actually. Then again we dont have any in the whole county afaik. Its not awfully fair but I suppose thems the rules.

Huskies will be put on the RB list I imagine but every other breed their size is on it so no bad thing really.

Rasmus

When restricted-breed dogs are banned from parks, does that mean off the lead, or is it a blanket ban?

Whispered

**Vai** wrote: »

Huskies will be put on the RB list I imagine but every other breed their size is on it so no bad thing really.

I think every dog put on it is a shame. It's bringing us closer and closer to a society where all dogs must be kept on leads & muzzled at all times.

fatmammycat

Rasmus wrote: »

When restricted-breed dogs are banned from parks, does that mean off the lead, or is it a blanket ban?

It's a total ban, most park ususally have the list up on the gate. I could socialise my pup in them when he was little. Lucky for me I joined up with a dog walking group that were more than happy to have a gobby limb flailing GSD in tow.

**Vai**

Whispered wrote: »

I think every dog put on it is a shame. It's bringing us closer and closer to a society where all dogs must be kept on leads & muzzled at all times.

I wouldnt go that far honestly but Im with you in that I'd like to see a return to how it used to be for all dogs in this country. When they wandered around estates without issue. Unfortunately that wont happen so it shouldnt be one rule for huskies and another for the dogs on the list. We always talk about how all dogs can be dangerous and I think thats true.

Nothing against huskies or mals etc by the way. Have as much love for them as any other dog.

andreac

**Vai** wrote: »

I wouldnt go that far honestly but Im with you in that I'd like to see a return to how it used to be for all dogs in this country. When they wandered around estates without issue. Unfortunately that wont happen so it shouldnt be one rule for huskies and another for the dogs on the list. We always talk about how all dogs can be dangerous and I think thats true.

Nothing against huskies or mals etc by the way. Have as much love for them as any other dog.

Sorry but I disagree. Dogs should not be allowed to wander around anywhere. That is def not the way it should go back to at all.

boopadoopadoop

Synyster Shadow wrote: »

I had an Alaskan malamute and he was afraid of his own shadow he was off lead just about everywhere like forest and farms and I never had any problem with him I think it should be assessment on that particular dog not its breed. Iv always had a RB and they never live up to what they should be.

Yes I completely agree! To ban an entire breed is silly. I can understand and agree with individual dogs (and their owners) being banned but not a breed! Seems unfair.

**Vai**

andreac wrote: »

Sorry but I disagree. Dogs should not be allowed to wander around anywhere. That is def not the way it should go back to at all.

Whether we agree or not, thats how it was. Im not foolish enough to think it would work these days, it was meant as an 'in a perfect world' comment.

andreac

**Vai** wrote: »

Whether we agree or not, thats how it was. Im not foolish enough to think it would work these days, it was meant as an 'in a perfect world' comment.

You could say a lot of things were like that back in the day, most of them were wrong , so not sure why someone would want it to go back like that?

juniord

does anyone know for sure if an individual public park manager /management can decide an entire breed which is not RB can be banned from a public park

**Vai**

andreac wrote: »

You could say a lot of things were like that back in the day, most of them were wrong , so not sure why someone would want it to go back like that?

Most what was wrong? I dont get where you're going with this. Ive explained what I meant and there was nothing else to it.

magicherbs

TBH it's difficult to take some of you seriously at times. You seem to be incomplete denial that the dogs you own are actually dangerous. All dogs are dangerous. They're dangerous to children and the infirm and they're a danger on the roads as cars swerve to avoid hitting them. If you don't accept this simple truth you're completely in denial and will not be taken seriously by anyone else.

Secondly, people have priority over dogs. Full stop. Period. No other way. Your dog isn't entitled to anything, except not to be treated with cruelty. Your dog isn't entitled to bark at every person that walks up and down the street. Your dog isn't entitled to use parks. You dog isn't entitled to freedom of speech or freedom of passage. They are things for people.

Dogs are property. Accept this and move on. Your property does not have priority over human being.

With regard to restricted breeds, I agree it isn't a fully scientific, rationale or sensible declaration. As we all anecdotally know, the local jack russell terrier is far more of a nuisance than the local pit bull.

However, we do not have adequate selection over breeding and ownership. And any scumbag, idiot, naive, stupid, reckless, neglectful person can purchase a strong/big dog. At the end of the day Jack Russells can give you a nasty bite that will require hospital treatment but a Rhodesian Ridge back, could, if it had the inclination, kill a child. I personally don't trust these types of people to own and be in possession on the street - knives, screw drivers, bats, or big dogs or cats (if, heaven forbid, we begin to get a culture of scumbags buying pumas).

If your dog intimidates people its YOUR fault not theirs.

fatmammycat

magicherbs wrote: »

TBH it's difficult to take some of you seriously at times. You seem to be incomplete denial that the dogs you own are actually dangerous. All dogs are dangerous. They're dangerous to children and the infirm and they're a danger on the roads as cars swerve to avoid hitting them. If you don't accept this simple truth you're completely in denial and will not be taken seriously by anyone else.

Secondly, people have priority over dogs. Full stop. Period. No other way. Your dog isn't entitled to anything, except not to be treated with cruelty. Your dog isn't entitled to bark at every person that walks up and down the street. Your dog isn't entitled to use parks. You dog isn't entitled to freedom of speech or freedom of passage. They are things for people.

Dogs are property. Accept this and move on. Your property does not have priority over human being.

With regard to restricted breeds, I agree it isn't a fully scientific, rationale or sensible declaration. As we all anecdotally know, the local jack russell terrier is far more of a nuisance than the local pit bull.

However, we do not have adequate selection over breeding and ownership. And any scumbag, idiot, naive, stupid, reckless, neglectful person can purchase a strong/big dog. At the end of the day Jack Russells can give you a nasty bite that will require hospital treatment but a Rhodesian Ridge back, could, if it had the inclination, kill a child. I personally don't trust these types of people to own and be in possession on the street - knives, screw drivers, bats, or big dogs or cats (if, heaven forbid, we begin to get a culture of scumbags buying pumas).

If your dog intimidates people its YOUR fault not theirs.

That's a hell of a misplaced rant. I must remember this the next time some old biddy with a frothing at the mouth mini-terror approaches me and my potentially dangerous yet curiously placid RB dog.
I must remember that if her dog bites me or my dog it is my fault for intimidating them, and that because a 'non scientific rational sensible declaration' based on a knee jerk UK model, my own dog must do absolutely nothing to protect either himself or me.
I must remember that even though ALL dogs have the potential to be dangerous, it is only members of said knee-jerk list who are to demonised and treated as t-rexs on leashes. I am to disregard any and all other large breed dogs roaming about, barking and doing whatever it is that dogs do. Labradors have teeth made of candy-floss and St Bernards are only on stand-by to deliver brandy for shock. I must forget that the highest pay out for a dog bite in this country was for a collie, as that should never factor into anything. I must remember not to leave my own brain at home- with the non violent cats- lest I reconsider for a moment that if my dog was ACTUALLY aggressive I would have him muzzled and leashed anyway, regardless of his breed.

Seriously, while I agree with much of what you say ( people should be able to go about their daily business unencumbered), the idea that a certain breed in the right hands is likely to be more troublesome than any other breed is nonsense. If people are worried about the wrong kind of people getting the wrong kind of dog then it should be made more difficult for the wrong kind of people to access said animal, not that said animal should pay the price of breed legislation.

DBB

There seems to be some bad manners, unnecessary rants, and unnecessary bitchiness going on in this thread. For crying out loud, how many times do I have to remind people to read the forum charter before posting here, it is a requirement of your membership. On it, you will find that you must be civil and respectful towards other posters. But I'm seeing several cases here in utter defiance of that. I do not understand why people have to keep flying off the handle, and having a good old soapboxing session, at the merest provocation... I do not believe that this nonsense would prevail without the anonymity the forum allows. Be nice. It's not that hard.
If I see one more vaguely bitchy, or soapboxing post, I will not hesitate to issue warnings and close the thread.
Do not reply to, nor comment on this post on thread.
Thanks,
DBB

Magenta

**Vai** wrote: »

Huskies will be put on the RB list I imagine but every other breed their size is on it so no bad thing really.

St. Bernards, Great Danes, Labradors, Dalmatians are not on it and they are all the same size or larger than huskies. If you ask me, it's the look of some husky owners who are giving them a bad rep (I've seen several huskies being walked down O'Connell St by unsavouries).

magicherbs wrote: »

TBH it's difficult to take some of you seriously at times. You seem to be incomplete denial that the dogs you own are actually dangerous. All dogs are dangerous. They're dangerous to children and the infirm and they're a danger on the roads as cars swerve to avoid hitting them. If you don't accept this simple truth you're completely in denial and will not be taken seriously by anyone else.

I think you are confusing "potential to be dangerous, if it was not trained and raised correctly" with "dangerous". I could swerve to avoid a rabbit, are they all dangerous too?

magicherbs wrote: »

Secondly, people have priority over dogs. Full stop. Period. No other way. Your dog isn't entitled to anything, except not to be treated with cruelty. Your dog isn't entitled to bark at every person that walks up and down the street. Your dog isn't entitled to use parks. You dog isn't entitled to freedom of speech or freedom of passage. They are things for people.

Can you point out where anyone said dogs have priority over humans, or that their dog barks at every person that walks up and down the street?
And who said they have freedom of speech?

magicherbs wrote: »

If your dog intimidates people its YOUR fault not theirs.

What about people who are afraid of dogs due to an irrational phobia? There's people who are afraid of flying, is that an airline's fault?

Vojera

I don't agree with the whole RB business, but to be honest I can see why huskies might get added to the list, and it has nothing to do with the dogs themselves.

I live in a reasonably rough area of Dublin and I've noticed over the last few years that the local scumbags have moved away from the stereotypical snarling staffie or pitbull towards huskies and husky crosses.

I honestly believe it's people like this who, by deliberately making their dogs aggressive, contribute to the perception that a whole breed is bad. And when it comes to law-making, unfortunately you have to legislate for the lowest common denominator.