Another fatal dog attack

Cortez

Tough but Fair
Joined
17 January 2009
Messages
15,576
Location
Ireland
Visit site
Wasn't it an Irish wolfhound in the news about severely biting a small child recently? Any dog, regardless of size, should be muzzled should it be likely to attack another dog. I don't think muzzling every dog is appropriate. It would distress many of them and is unnecessary in the majority of cases. Our local woods has a notice re muzzling and keeping on lead dangerous dogs and owners tend to adhere to this, at least the onlead bit, rarely see muzzles bar one dog walker who walks a poo eating terrier.
I’ve had Irish Wolfhounds for many years, and that is the first time I’ve ever heard of one biting someone, which just goes to prove that all dogs can be unpredictable. They have been bred, because of their size, to have laidback temperaments: imagine if they had the propensity to be aggressive?
 

inandout

Well-Known Member
Joined
2 November 2023
Messages
65
Visit site
A licence won't prevent a bite.

A bite-proof rigid wire muzzle would.

If it is genuinely impossible to legally define the dangerous ones, then when out in public, yes.

What harm does it do the dog?
.
There are concerns that the restrictions on exercise will increase dog attacks in the home and when dogs escape from the home


Sometimes you have to be realistic though. Banning isnt a great way to deal with this, but its something. If one persons life is saved due to it then its worth it. Its not going to be a proper fix, but it will massively reduce the number of these dogs in pet homes, or being rehomed for cheap on gumtree. Sadly when you cant get a GP appointment, or the police wont come out when youve been burgled, and councils are going bust, I'm quite surprised that anything at all has been done.

Its likely to go the other way and cost more peoples lives, all the research on bsl in the uk has shown an increase in fatalaties since it was introduced. Thats going back 30 years, xls have only been around for less than a decade.

There is a problem in these islands with the way people conduct the breeding, keeping, registering and licencing of pet animals, there are widespread issues with the refusal to consider rules and accountability and also the way dogs are viewed as commodities and accessories.
So when the problem drags on and action is finally required, only overkill will do. People will say 'ban these awful dogs' but be fine with going and paying £kkk for a poorly bred, genetic shitshow from out of someone's car boot, from two dogs with no papers, bred back to back twice a year, and pat themselves on the back because it doesn't have a flat face, when it all feeds into the same problem.

Now I predict that some people will get offended and say 'waaah, but it's better than x, y, z a country.

Thats cutural, thats why i find the calgary system interesting, basically its just a dog tax/license. Plenty of european countries and cities in canada and america have it, but none of them show a decrease in bites as a result. Calgary does. I believe the way it was introduced caused a culture shift to responsible ownership. The license itself is probably symbolic really. If you just put in licensing in uk will it fail like most places if the cuture hasnt changed. In essence the dog control coalation was talking about educating people on resonspible ownership/breeding thus changing the culture.
Thank you.

So then we are down to the dogs right to communicate unimpeded out in public open spaces, the owner's right not to have to spend time and money taking the dog to a hired venue (if available) and the public's right to walk themselves or their own dogs without fear.

My understanding has increased, thank you, but my opinion hasn't changed.
.

Why shud one persons right to enjoy public spaces override anothers basically. You are afriad of large unmuzzled dogs, so what! Plenty of people are afraid of teenagers ethniic minorities ect but we dont restrict there use of public spaces. In reality your argument can be turned around and you shud find a private venue to walk if you struggle in public. Saying you shudnt have to do this is just as entitled as dog owners saying there dog shud be off lead and running freely everywhere. In truth lots of places restrict dogs or ban then so you can easily find a dog free area if you wish.

Are you saying that 1000s of XL bully owners are not going to comply with the requirements?

This is what I can't get my head round. Why would 1000s of people who claim to love their dog risk having it seized, to at best languish in police kennels for months, at worst PTS.

How do you define an xl bully, is the american bulldog an xl bully what about the boxer cross mastiff? Defra already said the ban is aimed at xls not other breeds but type is still being used so its extra confusing. Lots of people wont exempt because there dog is vaguely type but not an xl. Others cant afford it or simply disagree entirely.

Mr Rawlinson argued that the police have 'no time' to police and enforce the new ban which was promised by Prime Minister Rishi Sunak following a spate of high-profile attacks earlier this year, including the savaging of an 11-year-old girl and the death of a man in Staffordshire at the hands of two of the dangerous dogs.

'The police have no time for it - they're not coming out when people are getting burgled, they're not going to come out for someone with a dog that looks like a mastiff to check if it's banned,' he said.

'Nobody is going to admit that their dogs are of a certain bloodline and there is not a hope in hell of enforcing this. This ban isn't going to do anything. Who's going to enforce it? Where are the resources?''

;;
 

skinnydipper

Well-Known Member
Joined
11 February 2018
Messages
7,206
Visit site
yeah bsl is the same old solution thats failed for 30 years, do we want another 30 years of increased attacks increased deaths and decreased responsible ownership. Its certainly not done us any favours so far.

the dog control coalation was talking about educating people on resonspible ownership/breeding thus changing the culture.

What's stopped them, they've had plenty of time.


For people who do not know the The Dog Control Coalition comprises Battersea, Blue Cross, British Veterinary Association, Dogs Trust, The Kennel Club, RSPCA, Scottish SPCA and Hope Rescue.
 

skinnydipper

Well-Known Member
Joined
11 February 2018
Messages
7,206
Visit site
Ill mannered/aggressive dogs and irresponsible/ignorant owners are nothing new. We have a thread of over 3000 posts. https://forums.horseandhound.co.uk/threads/irresponsible-owners.814204/

People need to learn about dog behaviour and make some attempt to train them because they are spoiling things for others.

Having a dog since childhood counts for nothing if you (one) haven't bothered to learn anything about them..

I now avoid other people and their dogs as much as possible.
 

CorvusCorax

'It's only a laugh, no harm done'
Joined
15 January 2008
Messages
59,565
Location
End of the pier
Visit site
Having a dog since childhood counts for nothing if you (one) haven't bothered to learn anything about them..

This. I have a sink in my house, doesn't mean I know anything about plumbing etc etc. What really widened my own knowledge was considering/observing lots of other peoples' dogs, not just the ones living in my house. And still learning every day.
 

Chucho

Well-Known Member
Joined
8 February 2023
Messages
154
Visit site
There does seem to be something particular about the UK context though. Or maybe even just England. Lots of people (lacking dog sense), lots of dogs, lack of space, lack of respect for others including dogs? I hear people saying they're scared of dogs and want muzzling etc and get it. I avoid strange dogs a lot too. At the same time, it just seems a sticking plaster for a wider issue of breeding and management and lifestyle choices. Honestly, this whole thread just makes me sad because dogs can and do bring so much joy and enrichment to both adults and (dare I say it 😱) children.
 

ycbm

Einstein would be proud of my Insanity...
Joined
30 January 2015
Messages
58,860
Visit site
There are concerns that the restrictions on exercise will increase dog attacks in the home and when dogs escape

There is no reason for exercise to be restricted. That would be the choice of the owner.



Why shud one persons right to enjoy public spaces override anothers basically. You are afriad of large unmuzzled dogs, so what! Plenty of people are afraid of teenagers ethniic minorities ect but we dont restrict there use of public spaces. In reality your argument can be turned around and you shud find a private venue to walk if you struggle in public.

Because far more than one person for every person who wants to walk a potentially dangerous dog is affected, and the majority should be the ones in whose favour this falls.



In truth lots of places restrict dogs or ban then so you can easily find a dog free area if you wish.

The only restrictions in areas I know of is that the dog must be on a lead. The lead can be a retractable and there are also numerous stories on this thread of bullies pulling free from people who can't hold them. Easily? Please advise me where it would be possible for me to do a 5 mile walk on a manmade surface where I can be guaranteed not to come within biting distance of an unmuzzled dangerous dog, within an hour drive of CW12. I won't hold my breath while I wait for your answer.
.
 

inandout

Well-Known Member
Joined
2 November 2023
Messages
65
Visit site
What's stopped them, they've had plenty of time.


For people who do not know the The Dog Control Coalition comprises Battersea, Blue Cross, British Veterinary Association, Dogs Trust, The Kennel Club, RSPCA, Scottish SPCA and Hope Rescue.
I believe they were due to announce the recomendations in full by the end of the year. In essece the xl ban sidetracked all of that. Most of the dcc members are opposed to bsl and have withdrawn there support and cooperation from defra/goverment. Its possible they wil simply wait to the inevitable disasterous outcomes of the xl ban and then when whatever goverment is in power is desperate for a solution they will come forward. Of course it maybe too late and everyone will knwo the law on dogs cant be enforced and they will simply ignore any education or legislative changes.

The main reason that dog bites have increased over the past 30 years is that there are more dogs now than there were. Combine that with inexperienced / irresponsible owners and you have the current situation.

I beleive this to be the case, the xl situation is misleading. Xls have been the most sought after dog for the past few years which has attracted poor breeders, many people have brought xls with the idea of getting the money back on a litter. Dog ownership increased dramatically during covid including xls. Cost of living crisis has resulted in many people being unable to look after there dog e'g they r working alot more have less money to send the dog out with walkers/daycares. The frustration causes the dog to become reactive/aggressive. Owner cant afford behaviour al help or even a vet to pts if its gone that far and just keeps managing the situation until it breakes down and a serious incident occurs. Because of there recent popularity and there association as an earner xls have been hit hard by this. I think if any other breed that had been as popular in covid wud be in same boat atm. Yes xls have had some questionabe breeding practises but in reality what pedigree dog hasnt there is lots of inbreed/line breeding in many breeds ad even working breeds and crosses breeds, ive met working lurchers and terriers that were heavily line bred to a specifi dog. Similarly while some are extreme in conformation that is also true of many breeds. There is nothing unique to xls except circumstances.

There does seem to be something particular about the UK context though. Or maybe even just England. Lots of people (lacking dog sense), lots of dogs, lack of space, lack of respect for others including dogs? I hear people saying they're scared of dogs and want muzzling etc and get it. I avoid strange dogs a lot too. At the same time, it just seems a sticking plaster for a wider issue of breeding and management and lifestyle choices. Honestly, this whole thread just makes me sad because dogs can and do bring so much joy and enrichment to both adults and (dare I say it 😱) children.
I beleive 50 people a year are killed by dogs in the states. I expect because of the different political and social structure of the states its less noted. You of course have a very varied culture in the states re animals. In some area you are not supposed to use the term owner and say guardian instead in other areas you have the big lick horses.

There is no reason for exercise to be restricted. That would be the choice of the owner.





Because far more than one person for every person who wants to walk a potentially dangerous dog is affected, and the majority should be the ones in whose favour this falls.





The only restrictions in areas I know of is that the dog must be on a lead. The lead can be a retractable and there are also numerous stories on this thread of bullies pulling free from people who can't hold them. Easily? Please advise me where it would be possible for me to do a 5 mile walk on a manmade surface where I can be guaranteed not to come within biting distance of an unmuzzled dangerous dog, within an hour drive of CW12. I won't hold my breath while I wait for your answer.
.

How would it be the choice of the owner. Not everyone can access private land either financially or practically. Its purely speculation that the majority favour muzzles on dogs in public. You only have to read the comments on xl articles to see the general public have varied fews and many do not even support the ban, after all the ban essentially says muzzles in pubic yet has only 30000 signatures on a petition for the ban and 600000 signatures against a ban. Thats 20 times against as in favour. Obviously thats not just about muzzles in public but it wud be a key element. Assuming you live in england or wales any local council will have a list of pspo that include dog restrictions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JJS

Clodagh

Well-Known Member
Joined
17 August 2005
Messages
26,847
Location
Devon
Visit site
. Yes xls have had some questionabe breeding practises but in reality what pedigree dog hasnt there is lots of inbreed/line breeding in many breeds ad even working breeds and crosses breeds, ive met working lurchers and terriers that were heavily line bred to a specifi dog. Similarly while some are extreme in conformation that is also true of many breeds. There is nothing unique to xls except circumstances.
.
And their genetic predisposition? Their historic raison d’etre?
Many, many Labradors were poorly bred and owned by idiots during and since Covid. There has not been a huge increase in the killing of people and their pets by Labradors.
Some of your points I agree with, but I have huge issue with the one I’ve replied to.
 

Cortez

Tough but Fair
Joined
17 January 2009
Messages
15,576
Location
Ireland
Visit site
I believe they were due to announce the recomendations in full by the end of the year. In essece the xl ban sidetracked all of that. Most of the dcc members are opposed to bsl and have withdrawn there support and cooperation from defra/goverment. Its possible they wil simply wait to the inevitable disasterous outcomes of the xl ban and then when whatever goverment is in power is desperate for a solution they will come forward. Of course it maybe too late and everyone will knwo the law on dogs cant be enforced and they will simply ignore any education or legislative changes.



I beleive this to be the case, the xl situation is misleading. Xls have been the most sought after dog for the past few years which has attracted poor breeders, many people have brought xls with the idea of getting the money back on a litter. Dog ownership increased dramatically during covid including xls. Cost of living crisis has resulted in many people being unable to look after there dog e'g they r working alot more have less money to send the dog out with walkers/daycares. The frustration causes the dog to become reactive/aggressive. Owner cant afford behaviour al help or even a vet to pts if its gone that far and just keeps managing the situation until it breakes down and a serious incident occurs. Because of there recent popularity and there association as an earner xls have been hit hard by this. I think if any other breed that had been as popular in covid wud be in same boat atm. Yes xls have had some questionabe breeding practises but in reality what pedigree dog hasnt there is lots of inbreed/line breeding in many breeds ad even working breeds and crosses breeds, ive met working lurchers and terriers that were heavily line bred to a specifi dog. Similarly while some are extreme in conformation that is also true of many breeds. There is nothing unique to xls except circumstances.


I beleive 50 people a year are killed by dogs in the states. I expect because of the different political and social structure of the states its less noted. You of course have a very varied culture in the states re animals. In some area you are not supposed to use the term owner and say guardian instead in other areas you have the big lick horses.



How would it be the choice of the owner. Not everyone can access private land either financially or practically. Its purely speculation that the majority favour muzzles on dogs in public. You only have to read the comments on xl articles to see the general public have varied fews and many do not even support the ban, after all the ban essentially says muzzles in pubic yet has only 30000 signatures on a petition for the ban and 600000 signatures against a ban. Thats 20 times against as in favour. Obviously thats not just about muzzles in public but it wud be a key element. Assuming you live in england or wales any local council will have a list of pspo that include dog restrictions.
You have some supremely wonky reasoning going on there.....
 

inandout

Well-Known Member
Joined
2 November 2023
Messages
65
Visit site
And their genetic predisposition? Their historic raison d’etre?
Many, many Labradors were poorly bred and owned by idiots during and since Covid. There has not been a huge increase in the killing of people and their pets by Labradors.
Some of your points I agree with, but I have huge issue with the one I’ve replied to.
The kimbo stuff is largely inflated by the media. Many dogs are the result of close line breeding (brother sister mating) occasionally popular sire syndrone results in a particular behaviour pattern appearing in a breed, there was a popular gsd stud in the 80s that produced very guardy pups that were too much for most owners. It was then bred away from. Even if Kimbo did produce a line of difficult dogs he is not a influencial dog in uk xl lines. In truth many xls are xl crosses as that was cheaper and you still got big money for pups.
Many breeds have a historic reputation for aggression. When newfies first came in the victorian era they were considered wild and aggressive and demonised by the media. In essence thats been happening ever since, 30 years later danes were considered the killer dog of the day and were demonised in same way. Labradors and newfies come from the same foundation dog the st johns water dog (now extinct). All of these breeds are no longer considered aggressive though aggression does occur in them sometimes as a genetic blip other times as a result of bad breeding practises and sometimes purely leant behaviour.



Except you have removed the choice from them to walk there under control none aggressive dog in the way they wish cause it makes you feel more comfortable. You may say them walking the dog how they wish interfers with you use of public space but all use of pulic space involves comprimise
 
  • Like
Reactions: JJS

inandout

Well-Known Member
Joined
2 November 2023
Messages
65
Visit site
It would be the choice of the owner not to walk their dog if they won't walk it without a muzzle.
.
Except you have removed the choice from them to walk there under control none aggressive dog in the way they wish cause it makes you feel more comfortable. You may say them walking the dog how they wish interfers with you use of public space but all use of pulic space involves comprimise
Once again that can easily be applied to horses. Horses dont bite of course (generally) but this removes the ability to muzzle them to prevent incidents. In essence why shud horses be in public as they can bolt/kick and the rider/handler cannot stop them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JJS

skinnydipper

Well-Known Member
Joined
11 February 2018
Messages
7,206
Visit site
What's stopped them, they've had plenty of time.


For people who do not know the The Dog Control Coalition comprises Battersea, Blue Cross, British Veterinary Association, Dogs Trust, The Kennel Club, RSPCA, Scottish SPCA and Hope Rescue.

I believe they were due to announce the recomendations in full by the end of the year. In essece the xl ban sidetracked all of that. Most of the dcc members are opposed to bsl and have withdrawn there support and cooperation from defra/goverment. Its possible they wil simply wait to the inevitable disasterous outcomes of the xl ban and then when whatever goverment is in power is desperate for a solution they will come forward. Of course it maybe too late and everyone will knwo the law on dogs cant be enforced and they will simply ignore any education or legislative changes.

I'm afraid you've missed my point. The Dangerous Dogs Act came into force in 1991. If it was something those organisations didn't feel was effective and have always been opposed to, why didn't they take action before now?
 

inandout

Well-Known Member
Joined
2 November 2023
Messages
65
Visit site
I don't think the type of people who buy dogs as an investment/for a return, are the ones spending money on daycare and walkers.
Agree but you will have 2 sides of the coin, 1 person who got an xl to breed it and make money back and now has no interest in the dog cause the cost of living had messed that up so they hang onto the dog until things get better.
Another person who got the dog as a pet for all the normal reasons (remember people have different taste in animals apearance, some people like tbs and some like drafts. Its whippets vs xls in the equine sense) and is now struggling to cover there basic costs let alone any extra for the dog. Xls were heavily promoted as pets by breeders (most arnt working dogs realistically) and many people brought for that purpose.
I'm afraid you've missed my point. The Dangerous Dogs Act came into force in 1991. If it was something those organisations didn't feel was effective and have always been opposed to, why didn't they take action before now?
There have been numerous attempts to remove or redesign the dda since it was introduced. Makority of these have been championed by these organisations. The 2018 efra meeting on dangerous dogs for example incuded extensive discussion of the failings of the act.

 

Cortez

Tough but Fair
Joined
17 January 2009
Messages
15,576
Location
Ireland
Visit site
The kimbo stuff is largely inflated by the media. Many dogs are the result of close line breeding (brother sister mating) occasionally popular sire syndrone results in a particular behaviour pattern appearing in a breed, there was a popular gsd stud in the 80s that produced very guardy pups that were too much for most owners. It was then bred away from. Even if Kimbo did produce a line of difficult dogs he is not a influencial dog in uk xl lines. In truth many xls are xl crosses as that was cheaper and you still got big money for pups.
Many breeds have a historic reputation for aggression. When newfies first came in the victorian era they were considered wild and aggressive and demonised by the media. In essence thats been happening ever since, 30 years later danes were considered the killer dog of the day and were demonised in same way. Labradors and newfies come from the same foundation dog the st johns water dog (now extinct). All of these breeds are no longer considered aggressive though aggression does occur in them sometimes as a genetic blip other times as a result of bad breeding practises and sometimes purely leant behaviour.




Except you have removed the choice from them to walk there under control none aggressive dog in the way they wish cause it makes you feel more comfortable. You may say them walking the dog how they wish interfers with you use of public space but all use of pulic space involves comprimise
There is a major flaw in your argument: the labrador, newfoundland, whatever, was never bred for specifically being an aggressive, gripping, fighting dog. The "Kimbo stuff" is quite well researched, actually, as is the fact that american bull breeds are responsible for the majority of dog-on-dog attacks in the UK (and US), despite being a much smaller proportion of the breeds represented, and a high percentage of attacks and fatalities on people.

No one has the right to walk their dog in a way that scares people.

Horses do not routinely attack members of the general public; your argument is specious.
 

skinnydipper

Well-Known Member
Joined
11 February 2018
Messages
7,206
Visit site
There have been numerous attempts to remove or redesign the dda since it was introduced. Makority of these have been championed by these organisations. The 2018 efra meeting on dangerous dogs for example incuded extensive discussion of the failings of the act.

EFRA BSL Inquiry | DDA Watch Response.

So you are a volunteer for DDA Watch?

I don't agree with this "The founding principles of DDA Watch are that no dog is inherently dangerous by virtue of its breed alone"

Genetics. Pitbulls were bred to be tenacious fighters.

People in the UK have continued to breed them and buy them and cross breed them. And now we are in this situation. What is your solution for that?
 
Last edited:

Chucho

Well-Known Member
Joined
8 February 2023
Messages
154
Visit site
I have family who come from a place of civil unrest. Big dogs and guns under the pillow the norm for property protection. They always had big dogs, including dobes, English mastiffs, dane crosses. I remember having a conversation with my uncle years back when he said he wouldn't have a pit of any description if you paid him. He said that they're just too unpredictable for the job he needs given their breeding history. I found it really interesting at the time as I'm not particularly a fan of BSL unless absolutely necessary and have known some nice pibbles. It totally challenged my views. This thread always makes me think about that conversation.
 

inandout

Well-Known Member
Joined
2 November 2023
Messages
65
Visit site
There is a major flaw in your argument: the labrador, newfoundland, whatever, was never bred for specifically being an aggressive, gripping, fighting dog. The "Kimbo stuff" is quite well researched, actually, as is the fact that american bull breeds are responsible for the majority of dog-on-dog attacks in the UK (and US), despite being a much smaller proportion of the breeds represented, and a high percentage of attacks and fatalities on people.

No one has the right to walk their dog in a way that scares people.

Horses do not routinely attack members of the general public; your argument is specious.
irish wofhounds were originally war dogs and meant to be as good as 2 soliders in battle. Supposedly the breed went extinct and moderns iw are a recreation based on crossing danes/deerhounds/mastiffs. Mastiffs typically used as guard dogs throughout history. Yet iw are considered gentle giants but have bitten people as discussed in the past few pages. Is that cause they have mastiff in them?
Regardless of if the american bull breeds kill more people than other breeds there is no stats to show banning them reduces deaths. Bullywatch and dogbites.org base there states on ancedotal evidence. E;g someone thinks the dog that bite them was a pit.

If someone is scared of dogs on a phobic level they will be scared regardless of how its walked. terrier on lead and muzzle they will still be scared. Even if they feel better with a big dog on lead and muzzle theres no guarantee the muzzle is securely fitted the handler will hang onto the lead or indeed you wont meet the dog when its escaped and is full of built up frustation. Barrier frustation and muzzle combat are common ways of training guard dogs. Do we want to inadvertabtly train every big dog to be a guard dog?
I have family who come from a place of civil unrest. Big dogs and guns under the pillow the norm for property protection. They always had big dogs, including dobes, English mastiffs, dane crosses. I remember having a conversation with my uncle years back when he said he wouldn't have a pit of any description if you paid him. He said that they're just too unpredictable for the job he needs given their breeding history. I found it really interesting at the time as I'm not particularly a fan of BSL unless absolutely necessary and have known some nice pibbles. It totally challenged my views. This thread always makes me think about that conversation.
Pits werent really guard breeds. Hog hunting and dog fighting but not much as guards.
So you are a volunteer for DDA Watch?

I don't agree with this "The founding principles of DDA Watch are that no dog is inherently dangerous by virtue of its breed alone"

Genetics. Pitbulls were bred to be tenacious fighters.

People in the UK have continued to breed them and buy them and cross breed them. And now we are in this situation. What is your solution for that?

No they just have a link. Many breeds were bred to be tenacious fighters. Lgds for example will kill large predators. Gsd will hold onto the criminal despite being stabbed.
As people have continued to have pits despite a ban I feel a ban is pointless regardless of your opinion of pits. So no bsl. Concentrate on section 2 of the dda which requires all dogs to be under control and 1 of the legal definitions of that is a dog must not cause a reasonable fear of harm. Note use of the term reasonable.
 

skinnydipper

Well-Known Member
Joined
11 February 2018
Messages
7,206
Visit site
Many breeds were bred to be tenacious fighters. Lgds for example will kill large predators

I know a little bit about LGDs if you would like a discussion as to how they work, the differences in how the different breeds deal with a threat and what they regard as a threat :)

ETA. Generally speaking they don't have a death wish and rely on size, posturing and barking to deter a predator. There is usually a pack who work together. Some breeds stay close to the herd/flock, some like the Kangal will pursue the predator which is why they are sometimes kept in a mixed breed pack. Do you wish to continue the discussion?
 
Last edited:

ycbm

Einstein would be proud of my Insanity...
Joined
30 January 2015
Messages
58,860
Visit site
Except you have removed the choice from them to walk there under control none aggressive dog in the way they wish cause it makes you feel more comfortable. You may say them walking the dog how they wish interfers with you use of public space but all use of pulic space involves comprimise
Once again that can easily be applied to horses. Horses dont bite of course (generally) but this removes the ability to muzzle them to prevent incidents. In essence why shud horses be in public as they can bolt/kick and the rider/handler cannot stop them.

You continued and frankly ridiculous attempts to bring killer horses into the discussion tells me how little basis you have for your arguments.
.
 

inandout

Well-Known Member
Joined
2 November 2023
Messages
65
Visit site
I know a little bit about LGDs if you would like a discussion as to how they work, the differences in how the different breeds deal with a threat and what they regard as a threat

Yes they are fascinating. The drives and behavious are quite different to many working breeds but the role is different so makes sense. They have as much variation in working style as any type of dog eg some will bark mostly and even drive/guide the sheep away from the threat other breeds will actively seek out the threat and try and kill it. I find there use in predator reintroduction programes especially interesting. I believe they have been used to some success in cheetah conservation in namibia.

You continued and frankly ridiculous attempts to bring killer horses into the discussion tells me how little basis you have for your arguments.
.
Im simply using them as a comparision if i was on a farming page I wud use cattle as the example. The stats of cattle based deaths r highther than horses and dogs yet it cud be argued the average person has even less contact with cattle than horses.

 

ycbm

Einstein would be proud of my Insanity...
Joined
30 January 2015
Messages
58,860
Visit site
Im simply using them as a comparision if i was on a farming page I wud use cattle as the example. The stats of cattle based deaths r highther than horses and dogs yet it cud be argued the average person has even less contact with cattle than horses.

Yes I know but it's a stupid comparison, as is the cattle one, sorry if that offends.
 

Chucho

Well-Known Member
Joined
8 February 2023
Messages
154
Visit site
Pits werent really guard breeds. Hog hunting and dog fighting but not much as guards.
Sure. But that is exactly my point. You can't separate these dogs from their breeding history, is what I'm trying to say. Or lump them in with other large breeds bred for other purposes just because they are also big dogs.
 

CorvusCorax

'It's only a laugh, no harm done'
Joined
15 January 2008
Messages
59,565
Location
End of the pier
Visit site
I understood it was the other way around, that there was an allegation that Irish Wolfhound blood (and that the clue for their original purpose is in the name) was used to resurrect the Deerhound (based on the fact that the Loughrey sisters made a pact for one to burn all their paperwork if the other one of them died....I knew someone who used to work for them).

What GSD stud are you referring to in the 80s? As a generalisation in, while there is a lot of bottlenecking in GSDs, there seems to be a a much, much smaller gene pool in XL bullies, which is understandable in such a young breed/type.
 
Last edited:
Top