Dog attacks when both parties are on leads

AshTay said:
It's not like the other owner would have had to go more than a few feet out of his way or waited more than a few seconds to avoid them. Do you elbow past old people and pushchairs boarding the bus too???).

And the horse example is relevant. It's about good manners when out in public and not believing that the rest of the world revolves around you!!!

This was an unfortunate incident which could have been avoided had the other owner paused or given a slightly wider berth .
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but I don't believe where the incident happened has any bearing. If I am walking my dog down a footpath and come across another dog, I do not expect to have to stop. I also do not expect to think that my dog will be attacked in an unprovoked manner. These dogs should have a muzzle on at all times as the owner knows they are temperamental and should definitely pay up for any vets fees. Good manners would be to adequately train your animal and protect members of the public from harm. Blaming the other owner is completely wrong! Oh and no, the horse example is NOT relevant - dogs are governed by law to be "under control at all times" (clearly not here) and horses are NOT dogs! Horses do not savage other horses out on hacks, nor are they ridden on public footpaths where children could be savaged too. It only takes a small child to be walking the other dog and for that child to get caught up in the ensuing dog fight to cause a real tragedy and then would you so vehemently be sticking up for your "friend"?
 
Dobiegirl said:
OP what is the breed of these 2 dogs?, I have 2 Dobes who are very good but Im fully aware how the general numpty public perceive them, they have to be whiter that white as far as Im concerned. I dont want anyone pointing a finger and accusing them of anything so Im fully aware of my responsibilities , I also have public liabilty Insurance.

If something like this happened to me I would pay, I dont want the dog warden knocking on my door, I dont want my dogs to have a history and this is what will happen to your friend if they dont pay up.
Click to expand...

They have paid up.
They're greyhounds.
 
My dogs don't like other dogs coming up to them. They are always kept on the lead, but I will not muzzle them on the lead. This is because they have now been bitten three times by loose dogs coming up to them, and I would rather they can defend themselves. I do make sure I stay very aware of what is going on around me. The number of owners who think it is OK to let their dogs run up to mine is staggering though.
 
You seem to be getting quite defensive of your friend, as this friend has agreed to pay the vet bill they obviously feel partially responsible.

I think your point is that if you are walking along a footpath and turn a blind corner to find someone with two dogs bent down with their back to you would you feel it reasonable to walk past them or not ? If the dogs had muzzles on I would think the chances are they may react badly to my dog so I will wait or give them a very wide berth, if there are no muzzles then I would probably just walk past with me between my dog and them. Obviously I wouldn't push through them but neither would I think there was any reason to not walk past them.

Your friend knows that their dogs are likely to behave badly with other dogs and therefore should muzzle in areas where they are likely to come into close contact, to me a housing estate is the place where you would definitely muzzle. If in a park then maybe not, as there is plenty of room for other owners to give a wide berth and loose dogs should still be under control.

The other persons dog was injured by two dogs not under the full control of the owner so yes I do think your friend should pay the bill. Your friend could check their household insurance policy as they may be covered under that.
 
Last edited:
mcnaughty said:
I'm sorry, but I don't believe where the incident happened has any bearing. If I am walking my dog down a footpath and come across another dog, I do not expect to have to stop. I also do not expect to think that my dog will be attacked in an unprovoked manner. These dogs should have a muzzle on at all times as the owner knows they are temperamental and should definitely pay up for any vets fees. Good manners would be to adequately train your animal and protect members of the public from harm. Blaming the other owner is completely wrong! Oh and no, the horse example is NOT relevant - dogs are governed by law to be "under control at all times" (clearly not here) and horses are NOT dogs! Horses do not savage other horses out on hacks, nor are they ridden on public footpaths where children could be savaged too. It only takes a small child to be walking the other dog and for that child to get caught up in the ensuing dog fight to cause a real tragedy and then would you so vehemently be sticking up for your "friend"?
Click to expand...

Hang on a minute - I've said that they could have avoided it by being muzzled and she has paid up. I'm sticking up for my friend because...she's my friend. My point was that even though legally she may have been (though no onw seems to really know) at fault (and has paid up and usually does muzzle the dogs), the whole thing could have been avoided if the other owner had NOT walked his dog straight into the two dogs in question (I've not seen the crime scene so can't really comment on how much of an inconvience that would have been but i'm a dog owner too and I always give other dogs a wide berth with my dog a) for the safety of my own dog and b) because it's good manners, especially if the other owner is engaged in the delicate business of scooping up poo).
 
AshTay said:
I'm not sure where it happened other than on a footpath on a housing estate. The dogs were on short leads and weren't "out of control" - the other dog was walked INTO the dogs on leads. It's not like the other owner would have had to go more than a few feet out of his way or waited more than a few seconds to avoid them. I take it you don't have a dog. It usually takes all of about 20 seconds to pick up a poo. Is 20 seconds too much to ask? (If a few seconds wait makes you "damn peed off" you must have serious anger issues!!! Do you elbow past old people and pushchairs boarding the bus too???).
And the horse example is relevant. It's about good manners when out in public and not believing that the rest of the world revolves around you!!!

This was an unfortunate incident which could have been avoided had the other owner paused or given a slightly wider berth (they came out of an alleyway behind the crouched owner apparently so she didn't see him while mid-scoop). But I wasn't there so don't know full picture. It could also have been avoided if the 2 dogs were muzzled but as I mentioned in other post - the housing estate was felt safe enough not to need to....
Click to expand...

I would not have an out of control dog on a footpath. I dearly hope you don't have a dog with an attitude like that...
 
Lizzie66 said:
You seem to be getting quite defensive of your friend, as this friend has agreed to pay the vet bill they obviously feel partially responsible.

I think the point is that if you are walking along a footpath and turn a blind corner to find someone with two dogs bent down with their back to you would you feel it reasonable to walk past them or not ? If the dogs had muzzles on I would think the chances are they may react badly to my dog so I will wait or give them a very wide berth, if there are no muzzles then I would probably just walk past with me between my dog and them. Obviously I wouldn't push through them but neither would I think there was any reason to not walk past them.

Your friend knows that their dogs are likely to behave badly with other dogs and therefore should muzzle in areas where they are likely to come into close contact, to me a housing estate is the place where you would definitely muzzle. If in a park then maybe not, as there is plenty of room for other owners to give a wide berth and loose dogs should still be under control.
Click to expand...

At the risk of sounding defensive (I am and I'm not but I'm also bored ;)): a park is the place where you should definitely muzzle as there are more dogs off the lead, more kids leading dogs and loose dogs *should* be under control but usually aren't. Very rarely (near us anyway) are dogs off the leads on the housing estate and IMHO children shouldn't be walking dogs unsupervised near roads anyway.

Maybe it's just me but I've had my own dogs and looked after other people's dogs and I would never walk them up to other dogs which were on a lead, muzzled or not, as you just don't know.
 
Lizzie66 said:
You seem to be getting quite defensive of your friend, as this friend has agreed to pay the vet bill they obviously feel partially responsible.

I think your point is that if you are walking along a footpath and turn a blind corner to find someone with two dogs bent down with their back to you would you feel it reasonable to walk past them or not ? If the dogs had muzzles on I would think the chances are they may react badly to my dog so I will wait or give them a very wide berth, if there are no muzzles then I would probably just walk past with me between my dog and them. Obviously I wouldn't push through them but neither would I think there was any reason to not walk past them.

Your friend knows that their dogs are likely to behave badly with other dogs and therefore should muzzle in areas where they are likely to come into close contact, to me a housing estate is the place where you would definitely muzzle. If in a park then maybe not, as there is plenty of room for other owners to give a wide berth and loose dogs should still be under control.

The other persons dog was injured by two dogs not under the full control of the owner so yes I do think your friend should pay the bill. Your friend could check their household insurance policy as they may be covered under that.
Click to expand...

Agree with all of this.
 
OP Im glad your friend payed up, they did the right thing.

I agree with you in that in an ideal world the other person should have waited but unfortunately too many people have no consideration of others or are just plain numpties. If your friend cannot walk in a safe area then for her dogs safety and other dogs they do need to be muzzled. Its not fair I agree but unfortunately life isnt fair.
 
I had an instant a few years ago where I had my dog on his lead going past a family of 4 with 2 dogs that were not on leads.

Now my dog is as soft as they come and wouldn't hurt child or dog but he does tend to bark defensively (he has had bad experiences prior to us getting him). The other people didn't put their dogs on leads and they both ran to mine, who cowered away. One of the dogs growled and and went to bite, the other just growled. I dragged mine away and sped up to move away, the other dogs followed and again one went to bite. This time I asked them to put their dogs on leads until I got away from them, the woman went to get the leads but the man stopped her saying there was no need their dogs wouldn't do anything ! When they came at mine for a third time I did lose my rag slightly and informed the man that if he didn't control his dog then I would kick it if it went for mine again (I wouldn't have "kicked" kicked it, more put a foot under it and pushed it away). He said that if I did then he would kick me ! At this point the woman did grab the smaller more aggressive dog and I walked away, to be honest I was fuming and half hoped he did kick me as I'd have charged him with assault quicker than anything !

I think dog licences should be reintroduced and you should have to pass some basic level of competence and social awareness before you can get one!
 
AshTay said:
Maybe it's just me but I've had my own dogs and looked after other people's dogs and I would never walk them up to other dogs which were on a lead, muzzled or not, as you just don't know.
Click to expand...

You implying that the other person spotted your friend and the dogs and thought I know I'll wander over to say hello !

It sounds more as though they both happened to be on the same pavement and the other person didn't give your friend quite a wide enough berth.

When out walking your dogs do stop and standstill everytime you see someone else with a dog ? I know I don't, I make sure I have a grip on lead, maybe shorten it a little and put me between my dog and the OP and carry on walking.
 
Dobiegirl said:
OP Im glad your friend payed up, they did the right thing.

I agree with you in that in an ideal world the other person should have waited but unfortunately too many people have no consideration of others or are just plain numpties. If your friend cannot walk in a safe area then for her dogs safety and other dogs they do need to be muzzled. Its not fair I agree but unfortunately life isnt fair.
Click to expand...

this
 
mcnaughty said:
I'm sorry, but I don't believe where the incident happened has any bearing. If I am walking my dog down a footpath and come across another dog, I do not expect to have to stop. I also do not expect to think that my dog will be attacked in an unprovoked manner. These dogs should have a muzzle on at all times as the owner knows they are temperamental and should definitely pay up for any vets fees. Good manners would be to adequately train your animal and protect members of the public from harm. Blaming the other owner is completely wrong! Oh and no, the horse example is NOT relevant - dogs are governed by law to be "under control at all times" (clearly not here) and horses are NOT dogs! Horses do not savage other horses out on hacks, nor are they ridden on public footpaths where children could be savaged too. It only takes a small child to be walking the other dog and for that child to get caught up in the ensuing dog fight to cause a real tragedy and then would you so vehemently be sticking up for your "friend"?
Click to expand...

I'll be middle man and speed up your reply... :D

AshTay said:
It usually takes all of about 20 seconds to pick up a poo. Is 20 seconds too much to ask? (If a few seconds wait makes you "damn peed off" you must have serious anger issues!!! Do you elbow past old people and pushchairs boarding the bus too???).
And the horse example is relevant. It's about good manners when out in public and not believing that the rest of the world revolves around you!!!
Click to expand...
 
PandorasJar said:
I'll be middle man and speed up your reply... :D
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:

Anyway, I only came back on to update the thread and it's done and dusted now. I can see both sides of the argument but my (maybe wrong, maybe right) opinion is still that both parties should share some responsibility be it legally or morally.

And if the flaw in my attitude is that I expect people to take some responsibility for themselves and show consideration to others then maybe I shouldn't own dogs or horses (or even bother to exist) because I'm clearly in the minority! ;)

(that was tongue-in-cheek by the way).
 
AshTay said:
As I said before, I don't know the legalities of the situation. Apparently the dogs are muzzled in open spaces where there might be dogs off the lead because it seems 90% of owners have little to no recall over their loose dogs but on the pavement on their housing estate, dogs are rarely ever loose so the dogs get some muzzle-free time to sniff and be dogs.
Click to expand...

I would have the thought where the responsibility lies depends on where exactly this incident took place. If they were all in the middle of an open space, then it is fairly obvious that the owner of the lone dog allowed it to take him over to the 2 dogs, so he was not in full control of his dog (or extremely foolish). If, however, the 2 dogs were on a pavement/footpath with clearly defined boundaries and the lone dog and its owner were merely trying to pass, the responsibility would lie fairly and squarely with the owner of the 2 dogs.

ETA, connection difficulties meant that it took ages to post this, so I missed OP's last post.
 
Last edited:
AshTay said:
IMHO children shouldn't be walking dogs unsupervised near roads anyway.

.
Click to expand...

Why? My 12yo son walks our dog but he is small for his age so would definitely be at the same head height as a large dog on it's hind legs. Dog is small too and walks calmly and obediently to heel.

Children and random dogs minding their own business are NOT at fault here. Please stop trying to justify these dogs antisocial behaviour. Thankfully your friend has taken appropriate action now and hopefully will do so in future.
 
mcnaughty said:
Why? My 12yo son walks our dog but he is small for his age so would definitely be at the same head height as a large dog on it's hind legs. Dog is small too and walks calmly and obediently to heel.

Children and random dogs minding their own business are NOT at fault here. Please stop trying to justify these dogs antisocial behaviour. Thankfully your friend has taken appropriate action now and hopefully will do so in future.
Click to expand...

Simple answer? Because a dog is considered out of control legally if not handled by someone 16+.

I personally think there are a lot of kids better able to handle a nice dog than an adult and an ou of control one though.
 
The incident would have been avoided had the two greyhounds been muzzled. As the owner feels they need to be for many of their walks then I imagine now she'll be sure they are muzzled all the time whilst in public. The breed BTW does not surprise me at all, many GHs are muzzled while in public.
 
mcnaughty said:
Why? My 12yo son walks our dog but he is small for his age so would definitely be at the same head height as a large dog on it's hind legs. Dog is small too and walks calmly and obediently to heel.

Children and random dogs minding their own business are NOT at fault here. Please stop trying to justify these dogs antisocial behaviour. Thankfully your friend has taken appropriate action now and hopefully will do so in future.
Click to expand...

I'm not trying to justify anything. Stop trying to vilify me!! "Antisocial" is a little strong given that they've been walked where they were being walked at the weekend for years without incident but I do agree that it's unacceptable for a dog to attack another dog under any circumstances. The only other time they've attacked another dog was when one steamed up to them at full pelt in a park (they were on leads) - which is why they wear muzzles in the park.

I'm at head height with a large dog on it's hindlegs too!!! If you feel that your son is responsible enough to walk his dog along roads and is powerful enough to control it should it decide to pull him somewhere he doesn't want to go then that's fine. I don't think that smaller children should walk dogs on the streets unsupervised in case they get pulled into the road. They should also be taught to keep their dog at a safe distance from unknown dogs because it's the SENSIBLE thing to do. That's just my opinion!!
 
It's a difficult one but tbh I think the other owner was at fault he should not if gone near your friend dog

I have a Staffie and she is a fighter, I muzzle here when off lead and on lead I keep good control of her but if that happened to me I'd still pay up because I would feel bad about it knowing my dog is a fighter and how distressed the other owner would be, it's terrible upsetting when dogs fight, my Staffie and boxer had a terrible fight once (they ok together now) I was screaming hitting my Staffie with a stick and I could not get her off the boxer, in the end the boxer stopped with exhaustion and the Staffie had her by the neck and it took my busting my hand open punching her for a few mins to get her off, terrible experience I never want to witness again.
 
PandorasJar said:
Simple answer? Because a dog is considered out of control legally if not handled by someone 16+.

I personally think there are a lot of kids better able to handle a nice dog than an adult and an ou of control one though.
Click to expand...

Looked at the Kennel Club web site and couldn't find anything about age but basically, what a load of rubbish! So a child of 14 can babysit another child but cannot walk a dog until age 16. Scoff!
 
mcnaughty said:
I would definitely call savaging another dog to the point it needs veterinary care antisocial.

Vilify: to defame or slander.... now that is a little strong.
Click to expand...

To suggest that I thought that the dogs were justified in attacking another dog is a little strong!!

What none of us knows is how the other dog approached the 2 dogs. If they had dragged their owner across the street to attack the other dog then, yes, that would have been antisocial. I've seen them out and they don't growl or act agressive at passing dogs (they do bark excitedly at cats but that's to be expected of greyhounds) and they don't pull on the lead.

No one has asked how the other dog is - it's fine, btw. The veterinary care it needed was limited to cleaning up a few small cuts and scratches and some cream. The bulk of the cost of the bill was because it was an emergency appointment on a saturday evening, apprently. Who knows whether it might have gone further if they hadn't been pullled off but they were.
 
mcnaughty said:
Looked at the Kennel Club web site and couldn't find anything about age but basically, what a load of rubbish! So a child of 14 can babysit another child but cannot walk a dog until age 16. Scoff!
Click to expand...

It's buried in one of the Animal Health/Dangerous Dogs/Animal Welfare Acts.

And hmmm... you missed the big story last year on the 14yo babysitter then. Can't remember ins and outs but mum jailed because 14yo shouldn't have been in charge of sibling when an accident occured. Was on the news for a while as most disagreed with her getting charged.

I think laws will work in pretty much any way the person enforcing them decides on the day. There are enough catches and red tape to pursue most things.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top