Pet dog killed by hunting hounds

fits

Gerry T wrote: »

I could see a risk to the hound snagging the basket, but sure that's the risk and better the hound gets hurt than an innocent.

Well hounds are innocent really. They're just being hounds and honestly, they're lovely creatures.

But yes, dogs fight at times and when that happened and the whips caught napping (they're the riders who keep the hounds together) this little dog had no chance.

Gerry T

gozunda wrote: »

Sigh...No the dogs were not out to kill. They were on their way back by all accounts, weren't following the scent. They got away from their handler in an once off incident. Do dogs that get away from domestic situations and kill sheep for example - are they trained to do that - no? Well guess what it happens. Making a Christmas cake out of it ain't going to help any dog owner despite an obvious bias against those 'on horseback'. How do you feel about gun dogs or other traditional forms of hunting that use dogs?

Drag packs are trained to follow a scent and not to kill whilst hunting. Unfortunately in this incident a pack of dogs on their way back (& not hunting) came across another dog and do what dogs often do. - fight. It's sad, it shouldn't have happened but it does happen even with the best behaved doggies out there.
There are many cases of domestic dogs killing other animals and we don't hear about many of those either.

I note you are determined (to use a pun) to keep barking up the one wrong tree. Best of luck with that.

I cant see us agreeing but I do feel we are arguing different points.
I do think the dogs were out to kill, they chased a scent and didn't get their prey. A little frustrated and saw a little dog and went for it "accidents happen" I hear you say.
I feel if your taking a single dog out for a walk and something starts to go wrong you can deal with the situation. Not if its a pack of hounds. There is a far greater responsibility to ensure no one gets hurt and that's the big difference. You fail to recognise this. Its not ok to go around public areas with loose hounds.

Gerry T

fits wrote: »

Well hounds are innocent really. They're just being hounds and honestly, they're lovely creatures.

But yes, dogs fight at times and when that happened and the whips caught napping (they're the riders who keep the hounds together) this little dog had no chance.

In an ideal world the hunt would take place on secure private lands and then there is far less risk of tragic accidents, yes hounds are beautiful animals.

fits

Gerry T wrote: »

A little frustrated and saw a little dog and went for it "accidents happen" I hear you say.
.

I would disagree with you on this. Hounds don't 'go' for small dogs. They fought with it as opposed to hunted it. I would think it was a dog fight rather than a hunter/prey thing.

Gerry T

fits wrote: »

I would disagree with you on this. Hounds don't 'go' for small dogs. They fought with it as opposed to hunted it. I would think it was a dog fight rather than a hunter/prey thing.

You may be right, by all accounts this was on the little dogs land so he was probably in protect mode. So a fight. But if the dog was scared and ran, then the chase started and it could well have been a "hunt" of sorts.
Fight, hunt, accident --- its all beside the substantive issue which is the situation happened and every effort needs to be taken to prevent these situations. If the dogs can't be muzzled could they be brought to/from the hunt in vans to minimise the amount of contact. I don't think its good enough to suggest as the amount of "accidents" are minimal that its a tolerable level of collateral damage.

TheFarrier

Gerry T wrote: »

You may be right, by all accounts this was on the little dogs land so he was probably in protect mode. So a fight. But if the dog was scared and ran, then the chase started and it could well have been a "hunt" of sorts.
Fight, hunt, accident --- its all beside the substantive issue which is the situation happened and every effort needs to be taken to prevent these situations. If the dogs can't be muzzled could they be brought to/from the hunt in vans to minimise the amount of contact. I don't think its good enough to suggest as the amount of "accidents" are minimal that its a tolerable level of collateral damage.

Hounds are brought to and from the hunt in vans

gozunda

Gerry T wrote: »

I cant see us agreeing but I do feel we are arguing different points.
I do think the dogs were out to kill, they chased a scent and didn't get their prey. A little frustrated and saw a little dog and went for it "accidents happen" I hear you say.
I feel if your taking a single dog out for a walk and something starts to go wrong you can deal with the situation. Not if its a pack of hounds. There is a far greater responsibility to ensure no one gets hurt and that's the big difference. You fail to recognise this. Its not ok to go around public areas with loose hounds.

Your possibly right on the first point. But the hounds were no more out 'to kill" than any other dog(s) on the street. It happened and was very unfortunate for the little dog. I am certain that any 'single dog' could given the opportunity cause a similar problem - dogs in a fight are nearly impossible to get apart in my experience. The rarity of this type of incident leads me to believe that hounds under the care of a good huntsman (in the losest sense of this term) will do exactly what they are told. I have seen a pack of hounds walk straight past a cat sitting on a low wall and they didn't break as stride. There is no earthly reason why we should have to lock up all dogs and hounds over one incident. Hounds are not dangerous animals either to the crowds of babies offered up here or other animals. That said like all animals owners need to make sure that their animals are safe for many reasons. Hounds normally have a full time minder with them, but like any animal accidents can happen. Cars kill, dogs get stolen, dogs stray etc etc. The logic that hounds should prevented from normal behaviour which rarely if ever causes problems does not make sense. Hounds are taught from a very young age to accept other animals and are most often reared in family homes. That this happened is sad but it could have been any dog. The fact that they are hounds has meant that some on the thread advocate rounding every hound in the country up and muzzling them. Quite bizarre reaction from one incident imo.

Gerry T

gozunda wrote: »

Your possibly right on the first point. But the hounds were no more out 'to kill" than any other dog(s) on the street. It happened and was very unfortunate for the little dog. I am certain that any 'single dog' could given the opportunity cause a similar problem - dogs in a fight are nearly impossible to get apart in my experience. The rarity of this type of incident leads me to believe that hounds under the care of a good huntsman (in the losest sense of this term) will do exactly what they are told. I have seen a pack of hounds walk straight past a cat sitting on a low wall and they didn't break as stride. There is no earthly reason why we should have to lock up all dogs and hounds over one incident. Hounds are not dangerous animals either to the crowds of babies offered up here or other animals. That said like all animals owners need to make sure that their animals are safe for many reasons. Hounds normally have a full time minder with them, but like any animal accidents can happen. Cars kill, dogs get stolen, dogs stray etc etc. The logic that hounds should prevented from normal behaviour which rarely if ever causes problems does not make sense. Hounds are taught from a very young age to accept other animals and are most often reared in family homes. That this happened is sad but it could have been any dog. The fact that they are hounds has meant that some on the thread advocate rounding every hound in the country up and muzzling them. Quite bizarre reaction from one incident imo.

I'm back
Maybe I can change how I present my case. Forget about hunting etc... If a person had say 10 animals - not only dogs; and an incident happened where these animals attacked and killed another animal, in a public place, I feel that additional precautions have to be taken to prevent that happening again. I don't agree that because its a rare incident that its acceptable.

I only suggest a muzzle because the alternative is to hold hunts on private land or have supervised areas which I guess is impractical. The reality is there are more people not involved in hunting than involved and if the hunting community can't adapt, and at least try to change what they do to prevent these incidents some lobby group will probably change it for them. That change will probably be drastic and unfair, but that's how it will most likely play out. Just trying to defend the tradition won't work IMO.

Gerry T

TheFarrier wrote: »

Hounds are brought to and from the hunt in vans

Pity the van wasn't on the other side of this persons property then.

gozunda

Gerry T wrote: »

I'm back
Maybe I can change how I present my case. Forget about hunting etc... If a person had say 10 animals - not only dogs; and an incident happened where these animals attacked and killed another animal, in a public place, I feel that additional precautions have to be taken to prevent that happening again. I don't agree that because its a rare incident that its acceptable.

I only suggest a muzzle because the alternative is to hold hunts on private land or have supervised areas which I guess is impractical. The reality is there are more people not involved in hunting than involved and if the hunting community can't adapt, and at least try to change what they do to prevent these incidents some lobby group will probably change it for them. That change will probably be drastic and unfair, but that's how it will most likely play out. Just trying to defend the tradition won't work IMO.

That's great..welcome back.

You say in your first paragraph to "forget about hunting" and then strangely go straight back to the subject in the next paragraph immediately!

I know of domestic dog owners that have for a better description what constitutes a 'pack of dogs'. I have passed houses in areas where these 'pets' were not confined and had access to the road etc. Quite an alarming experience if you are a cyclist or pedestrian or just happen to be taking a single dog for a walk. This is a much more common imo scenario than hounds running amuck.

Hounds are only brought out with one and more often several handlers. Sometimes as with all animals unintentional incidents may happen.

Lobby groups getting het up over such rare incidents especially where authorities have existing remit arn't going to get very far with this approach, btw i not defending any tradition simply the status question for all dog owners whose animals potentially may / possibly turn and maul / kill other pets or domestic animals. Hounds are not listed as dangerous animals for a reason. Muzzle one dog and you will have to muzzle all. Not a prospect I would support.

Gerry T

gozunda wrote: »

That's great..welcome back.

You say in your first paragraph to "forget about hunting" and then strangely go straight back to the subject in the next paragraph immediately!

I know of domestic dog owners that have for a better description what constitutes a 'pack of dogs'. I have passed houses in areas where these 'pets' were not confined and had access to the road etc. Quite an alarming experience if you are a cyclist or pedestrian or just happen to be taking a single dog for a walk. This is a much more common imo scenario than hounds running amuck.

Hounds are only brought out with one and more often several handlers. Sometimes as with all animals unintentional incidents may happen.

Lobby groups getting het up over such rare incidents especially where authorities have existing remit arn't going to get very far with this approach, btw i not defending any tradition simply the status question for all dog owners whose animals potentially may / possibly turn and maul / kill other pets or domestic animals. Hounds are not listed as dangerous animals for a reason. Muzzle one dog and you will have to muzzle all. Not a prospect I would support.

Dangerous dogs do have to be muzzled, or should be but some owners don't always do that. I was in the park recently and this guy goes past with a rotweiler, very considerate owner as he had the muzzle held in his hand !! he wouldn't control that dog if an accident happened, that's why it has to be muzzled.
http://www.environ.ie/en/LocalGovernment/DogControl/#Breed

The majority of dogs wouldn't be life threatening to most adults and as such muzzling would be un-necessary. But dogs in a pack do present a danger. Look at the case of the poor woman killed, they suspect she had a epileptic fit and her 2 pet dogs were startled and killed her, they were pitbulls so your taking a risk with that type of dog.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2521254/Leeds-woman-killed-dogs-home.html
I'm not suggesting hounds have that nature but in a pack it becomes less predictable and accidents happen. It doesn't matter if its a hunt or some careless
owner as you describe above, the risk of something happening is far greater than if it were a single dog. In all these cases something has to be done to minimise the risk, at some point something will happen so it makes sense for groups that use dog packs, such as hunting should take action first and show that they have the control measures in place to mitigate conceivable events. If that's done I wouldn't object to any drag hunt.

gozunda

Gerry T wrote: »

Dangerous dogs do have to be muzzled, or should be but some owners don't always do that. I was in the park recently and this guy goes past with a rotweiler, very considerate owner as he had the muzzle held in his hand !! he wouldn't control that dog if an accident happened, that's why it has to be muzzled.
http://www.environ.ie/en/LocalGovernment/DogControl/#Breed

The majority of dogs wouldn't be life threatening to most adults and as such muzzling would be un-necessary. But dogs in a pack do present a danger. Look at the case of the poor woman killed, they suspect she had a epileptic fit and her 2 pet dogs were startled and killed her, they were pitbulls so your taking a risk with that type of dog.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2521254/Leeds-woman-killed-dogs-home.html
I'm not suggesting hounds have that nature but in a pack it becomes less predictable and accidents happen. It doesn't matter if its a hunt or some careless
owner as you describe above, the risk of something happening is far greater than if it were a single dog. In all these cases something has to be done to minimise the risk, at some point something will happen so it makes sense for groups that use dog packs, such as hunting should take action first and show that they have the control measures in place to mitigate conceivable events. If that's done I wouldn't object to any drag hunt.

I agree about the control of dangerous breeds ....but on the the basis if we advocate the muzzling of all dogs for what very occasionally may happen so that all dogs even if they are not dangerous are labelled as 'dangerous dogs' and ignore dogs basic behaviours that may result in exceptional incidents such as that which happened here - We have a much bigger issue than a pack of hounds and another dog being territorial.

Hounds are not dangerous dogs and normally have experienced handlers who ensure that they are kept in control.
Muzzle hounds and you will have to muzzle every other dogs ever brought into any public place - you want that?

I don't ...,