Warning to other dog owners!!!! (Erdington canal)

[carlt]

I didn't suggest that dogs be kept on a lead, all of the time.

 

I have a lurcher, who likes running around at very high speeds.

 

To keep him on the lead, all the time, would be cruel but, on the tow path, or where he is likely to meet any dog, person or other animal, in a restricted area, he is on a lead.

 

Not because I don't trust him but because I do not trust other dogs, children, or adults not to react in a way that may scare him, or them.

 

I've said it before and been criticised for it. If a dog approaches me, or my dog, not on a lead, then it will be assumed to be dangerous and repelled forcibly.

 

There are plenty of places to let a dog run, without imposing it on people or other animals, that might not appreciate its attentions.

[Nightwatch]

I have found over many years of dog ownership that more than most dogs are okay to meet anywhere other than their own home, as long as one or both are 'not' on leads. this seems to be a trigger point for one of them to take the p==s out of the other, or they feel restricted and then go defensive. We see a dog on a lead, she goes on a lead. Our dog pulls to meet the other dog as is natural but understands our command, eventually.

 

We have a staffie and believe me there can't be any softer dog anywhere. We are her third owners and know little about her past aprt from she has had a litter and has had 'the' op. She is superb with the grandchildren and gets amongst them when they visit. having said that we wouldn't leave her alone with them for their or her safety.

 

She runs up to people to greet them in a friendly way but as soon as we see that people are uncomfortable with this she is called back and she does just that. Like all animals she has a mind of her own and we have to override that part of her and take charge.

 

We have photos but will have to find out how to post. That is not what this thread is about though.

 

She has been attacked once by another dog (sheep dog)causing a scar on her head near her eye.

 

If she had been on the lead the other day she wouldn't have got the chance to demolish a 'fishermans' luncheon meat bait much to his annoyance. I was talking to him in a friendly manner at the time and he asked me stop her eating his bait. Naughty but nice.

 

Martyn

Edited June 16, 2009 by Nightwatch1

[O'Mali]

Then you didn't actually check them very well, because there's no mention of other animals in Section 3 or any other part of the DDA.

I think the last time I looked at i the DDA it does have a mention of livestock.It is in the section where police dogs are mentioned I think, but not other dogs.

 

Anyways... a friends, mothers labrador was savaged by two pitbull types that belonged to a guy on a boat. The police went to visit him to get his side of the story as the lab owner claimed they were a danger.

 

When the officer reported back to the Lab owner, he said the dogs were well behaved and welcomed him in to the boat tails wagging. He said they are not dangerous and dogs will fight. He asked "did your dog start the fight?

 

I agree with all carlt has said here 100%.

[magnetman]

I didn't suggest that dogs be kept on a lead, all of the time.

 

You did in a way because you said "Despite all of this he is on a lead whenever we are on the tow path or other public place."

 

 

I imagine most people don't have access to areas of private land big enough to exercise a dog. A garden isn't really enough.

 

I disagree with keeping dogs on leads at all times in public places. a dog on a lead is in "defence mode" because it is attached to its owner and being faithful it will want to protect said owner. In my experience a dog is more likely to start a fight when on a lead than a dog which is off a lead. Thats not a universal truth its just an observation.

 

T

[fatboy]

Take the muzzle off and my moneys on the rotty

 

 

Trouble is people seem to think dogs should behave like humans. The dogs in question have actually behaved the way nature intended.

 

I agree with the point that the Shepard probably saw the fact that Rotty was muzzled and on a lead and thought it an easy win. I have two Boxers who play well with other dogs, but as soon as they are on lead other dogs try to take advantage even though they were best mates 5 minutes before.

 

Man who sleeps on towpath bench = Tramp

Man who sleeps ten yards away on 30 year old rotting leaking boat = Jolly good chap

[carlt]

You did in a way because you said "Despite all of this he is on a lead whenever we are on the tow path or other public place."

 

 

I imagine most people don't have access to areas of private land big enough to exercise a dog. A garden isn't really enough.

Selective quoting! Just because I keep my dog on a lead, in public places does not mean I believe everyone should.

 

These things happen and the only way to minimise it is to have a dog on the lead at all times, in places frequented by other dogs.

I have a lurcher, who likes running around at very high speeds.

 

To keep him on the lead, all the time, would be cruel but, on the tow path, or where he is likely to meet any dog, person or other animal, in a restricted area, he is on a lead.

 

Everybody has access to land where a dog can run free, and be kept away from other dogs. The towpath isn't one of those places.

 

I am fortunate enough to have access to large areas of private land, where I can exercise and work my dog, so he is on a lead everywhere else.

Edited June 16, 2009 by carlt

[stort_mark]

I think the last time I looked at i the DDA it does have a mention of livestock.It is in the section where police dogs are mentioned I think, but not other dogs.

 

Errrr. No. No mention of livestock, other animals or police dogs. Nothing.

 

And what's this about dogs behaving the way nature intended?? Dogs are domesticated animals and have been for rather a long time. It's like saying running around naked beating things to death with a stick is OK because that's the way nature intended homo sapiens to behave. With or without testicles. Jesus! Some of the crap that gets written on this forum!

Edited June 16, 2009 by stort_mark

[O'Mali]

Errrr. No. No mention of livestock, other animals or police dogs. Nothing.

 

And what's this about dogs behaving the way nature intended?? Dogs are domesticated animals and have been for rather a long time. It's like saying running around naked beating things to death with a stick is OK because that's the way nature intended homo sapiens to behave. With or without testicles. Jesus! Some of the crap that gets written on this forum!

http://www.defra.gov.uk/animalh/welfare/domestic/dogs.htm

and here also...

http://www.defra.gov.uk/animalh/welfare/do...wyouleaflet.pdf

 

Under the Town Police Clauses Act of 1847 it is an offence for any person in any street: to let an unmuzzled ferocious dog be at large so that it obstructs or annoys the residents or passengers in the street or puts them in danger; or to set on or to urge any dog to attack, worry or put in fear any person or animal. A dog will not be at large while it is held on a lead. The word 'street' here is given an extended meaning to include any road, square, court, alley, thoroughfare or public passage.

 

In the Metropolitan Police District a similar offence has been created by the Metropolitan Police Act of 1839. This differs only from the first part of the 1847 Act offence in that it is sufficient that an unmuzzled dog be at large (no obstruction, annoyance or danger need be shown), and that the place of the offence is described as any thoroughfare or public place.

 

Under the Dogs Act 1871, any person may make a complaint to a magistrates court that a dog is dangerous, or report the matter to the police. If the court is satisfied that a dog is dangerous and not kept under proper control, it may make an order for it to be controlled or destroyed.

 

The Animals Act 1971 provides that the keeper of an animal is liable for any damage it causes, if he knows it was likely to cause such damage or injury unrestrained.

 

It is an offence for a dog to be at large, ie not on a lead or otherwise under close control, in a field of sheep. Sheep dogs and police dogs are exempted from this provision.

Edited June 16, 2009 by O'Mali

[fatboy]

Oh.... Stort Marks gone quiet.

 

What was that about crap people write in forums or something .....

 

Sorry i didnt realise that the GS had been in training for 10 weeks getting ready for the fight.

 

for Nature see natural ......it is natural for some breeds of dog to attack when either they are defending their pack (owners) or their own space. If the shepard had been to the same spot with its owner , sprayed the area several times, it behaves in a way that would harp back to when its forfathers were wolves and defend the area it considers as its own.

 

This may not be everyones opinion but i hope most sensible people would not call it crap, just because it differs from their own veiw.

[Sir Nibble]

This may not be everyones opinion but i hope most sensible people would not call it crap, just because it differs from their own veiw.

Quite, and I hope you will take the following in the same light.

for Nature see natural ......it is natural for some breeds of dog to attack when either they are defending their pack (owners) or their own space. If the shepard had been to the same spot with its owner , sprayed the area several times, it behaves in a way that would harp back to when its forfathers were wolves and defend the area it considers as its own.

If this is true, then those breeds of dogs must be banned. Any creature for which "it is natural to attack" should be eradicated from any area where they might come into contact with people or their livestock. Full stop, no argument, every dog in the country being put down is preferable to one unprovoked attack upon an innocent person.

Fortunately, I think there are plenty of experts who would be horrified by your assertion and refute it utterly, however, I will not call it crap just because it differs from my own view. My own view being that the number of dog owners exceeds the number of responsible, aware people worthy of their dog by several orders of magnitude and some dogs, because of their owners shortcomings represent a public health risk.

[mayalld]

Why does a dog have to be on a lead if that dog is well behaved?

 

Martyn

 

Because if your dog encroaches on the space of another dog, and the other dog takes exception, a fight will ensue.

 

We have a dog that takes exception to other dogs in his face, and he is ALWAYS on his lead.

 

Time and again, some numpty with a dog off the lead gets stroppy when the fighting starts, and whinges that we should control our dog.

 

Perhaps if said numpty had the wit to control their dog.....

[Chertsey]

Oh.... Stort Marks gone quiet.

 

What was that about crap people write in forums or something .....

 

Sorry i didnt realise that the GS had been in training for 10 weeks getting ready for the fight.

 

for Nature see natural ......it is natural for some breeds of dog to attack when either they are defending their pack (owners) or their own space. If the shepard had been to the same spot with its owner , sprayed the area several times, it behaves in a way that would harp back to when its forfathers were wolves and defend the area it considers as its own.

 

This may not be everyones opinion but i hope most sensible people would not call it crap, just because it differs from their own veiw.

Far be it from me to get involved but Mark was referring to the Dangerous Dogs Act (a byword for ill conceived legislation) and the subsequent post referred to an entirely different and far older piece of legislation, so I don't see what your point is here. Anyway, people 'go quiet' on here for all sorts of reasons, generally because they have something better to do.

 

And your subsequent point, as has already been noted by others, makes a very good case for all dogs being banned, were it true.

 

Some things are differences of opinion, and some things are just crap, I'm afraid. Not passing any judgement as to which is which in this case (I know little about dogs and care even less as long as they don't bite me), but I get so sick of being told that no assertion, no matter how ill-informed, unfounded, or just plain incorrect can be criticised because for some reason, because it's 'an opinion', it's just as good as one that's well-researched, thought out and relates to known facts.

Edited June 17, 2009 by WarriorWoman

[O'Mali]

I was going to ask the OP… Is the towpath really a place for a Rotti that needs muzzling??

 

I have a Malinois from working stock. Her mouth is like a chain saw when she wants to chew some thing up. They are known as land sharks by the police & military forces, a very capable dog in the role of man work although I have taken the shutzhund route with my dog which is mostly agility with some personal protection work involved.

 

I have raised her to be ultra obedient. She is very sociable with people and other dogs but also very capable of repelling a dog attack or burglar

 

She does not need to be on a lead on the tow path, I simply call her to me (and her recall has been tested several times whilst under distraction of game etc) and I will not muzzle her either.

 

The canals are great places for dogs like mine, she is safe from speeding cars and is not interested in people unless they interact with her and she meets lots of other friendly dogs too.

 

I am always amazed when I see people on the tow path with dogs that are muzzled, pulling, growling then they start shouting from a distance to keep my dog away?? For one, she aint interested in your dog and two, why bring it here with limited space??

 

And for those of you who don’t know what a Malinois is or looks like here is a link to them performing doing what they do best… bringing a man to the floor.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QKf3Vhh0iWY

 

These dogs are not for inexperienced handlers BTW.

[Sir Nibble]

Good lord! Maybe we should all wander around with firearms with hair triggers and no safety catch.

[O'Mali]

Far be it from me to get involved but Mark was referring to the Dangerous Dogs Act (a byword for ill conceived legislation) and the subsequent post referred to an entirely different and far older piece of legislation,

That is true but it all comes under the same umbrella of the control of dogs.

 

Search on the defra site for DDA and all that comes up so if you have an out of control dog that they class as dangerous, any of those laws could be used against you under the DDA I would think, but I am no expert on law.

 

But you are correct, not strictly the DDA section whatever.

[Chagall]

Maybe its not just the dogs that need the muzzles...or the op!

[UptangLee]

I was going to ask the OP… Is the towpath really a place for a Rotti that needs muzzling??

 

In my case yes, He can be approached by people if its the right way. But his seems to wana chase people on bikes that fly passed. And he cant stand people that stand infront of him. Apart from that hes fine along the canal.

Edited June 17, 2009 by UptangLee

[Chertsey]

I was going to ask the OP… Is the towpath really a place for a Rotti that needs muzzling??

 

I have a Malinois from working stock. Her mouth is like a chain saw when she wants to chew some thing up. They are known as land sharks by the police & military forces, a very capable dog in the role of man work although I have taken the shutzhund route with my dog which is mostly agility with some personal protection work involved.

 

I have raised her to be ultra obedient. She is very sociable with people and other dogs but also very capable of repelling a dog attack or burglar

 

She does not need to be on a lead on the tow path, I simply call her to me (and her recall has been tested several times whilst under distraction of game etc) and I will not muzzle her either.

 

The canals are great places for dogs like mine, she is safe from speeding cars and is not interested in people unless they interact with her and she meets lots of other friendly dogs too.

 

I am always amazed when I see people on the tow path with dogs that are muzzled, pulling, growling then they start shouting from a distance to keep my dog away?? For one, she aint interested in your dog and two, why bring it here with limited space??

 

And for those of you who don’t know what a Malinois is or looks like here is a link to them performing doing what they do best… bringing a man to the floor.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QKf3Vhh0iWY

 

These dogs are not for inexperienced handlers BTW.

 

So it's all right as long as the dog's safe is it? I just don't understand this post - you are boasting about how potentially dangerous your dog is and then about how you take it out in a public place, with restricted space, without a lead... and (let me be sure I've got this right) if another dog attacks yours, its their owner's fault for having it on a lead?

 

From being neutral on the subject, this sort of post is rapidly converting me to the anti-dog (owner) brigade. It's so outrageous I can't believe I've read it right.

[Matthew Knowles]

I agree that dogs seem more grumpy when on a lead. There are dogs/owners locally who when we meet in the street and both dogs are on leads both dogs growl at each other but then when we meet in the fields and both dogs are loose they play together. I sometimes wonder whether the growling is not aggression towards each other but shared grumbling at their owners for not letting them play!

 

We often walk up the Cromford Canal and along here we have enough of a view along the canal to be able to respond to dogs/cyclists/pedestrians and control our dog as necessary. This is made easier by the fact that he's not a dog who runs way off ahead, he tends to walk through the undergrowth close to us. If we do see other dog owners then we'll tend to respond in kind, if they leash their dogs we do also otherwise we'll leave them loose and just monitor the two dogs "saying hello".

[O'Mali]

So it's all right as long as the dog's safe is it? I just don't understand this post - you are boasting about how potentially dangerous your dog is and then about how you take it out in a public place, with restricted space, without a lead... and (let me be sure I've got this right) if another dog attacks yours, its their owner's fault for having it on a lead?

 

From being neutral on the subject, this sort of post is rapidly converting me to the anti-dog (owner) brigade. It's so outrageous I can't believe I've read it right.

What is alright if the dog is safe? Do you mean being off a lead? If so then yes it is ok for them to be off the lead if they are stable, balanced, sociable and do as they are told.

 

My dog is all of the above and only potentially dangerous in the hands of a poor dog handler or if by design just like a GSD, Rotti or any dog for that matter.

 

If someone elses dog attacks mine then it is unstable and should not be on the tow path if it cannot simply walk past another dog or the owner control it.

 

BTW I was not boasting about anything, just pointing out that not all the guarding breeds are naturally dangerous.

[Matthew Knowles]

I think that rather than boasting about how dangerous his dog was O'Mali was trying to highlight how even a 'potentially dangerous' breed of dog can be kept under control with the proper handling. Rotties, for example, have a terrible reputation for being vicious dogs, however we have a friend with one and the biggest danger I think I face from him is from drowning from the excessive slobber!

Edited June 17, 2009 by Matthew Knowles

[O'Mali]

Thank you Matt.

 

When I say I wont put my dog on a lead, I did not mean ever, I meant all the time. I would of course do so at the request of another dog owner who had a problem dog.

 

ETA...They are all capable except some more than others…

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rTN5kTkdvME

 

Edited June 17, 2009 by O'Mali

[fatboy]

If dogs were left without human contact then yes lots would be a danger. We have taken a wild animal and domesticated it over hundreds of years. Its still a wolf at heart and will sometimes revert to its natural instinct.

Gun dogs search the undergrowth for kills even if they have never seen or heard a shotgun. Ridgebacks run alongside other dogs nipping at the rear legs because they are bred to bring down lions in SA. Its human control that shapes the dog into the way we want it to behave.

 

My two boxers are great friends always playing together sometimes the rough and tumble gets quite errr....rough but at the end they lay down together to get their breath back. They eat out of each others bowls, drink from the same bowl and sleep in each others beds. But if i were give them a bone each they will want to tear each other apart because that bone kicks in the natural instinct of the wolf and they revert back to type. I could give them a bone separatly and take it away when i wanted without a murmer from them.

Dogs are animals and without the correct training can be a danger. But they are here to stay so forget the "ban them all" stuff cos it just wont happen.

 

I apologise for poor spelling....its my hayfever kicking in! ?

[O'Mali]

In my case yes, He can be approached by people if its the right way. But his seems to wana chase people on bikes that fly passed. And he cant stand people that stand infront of him. Apart from that hes fine along the canal.

For real dude?

 

Sounds like you have a problem with dominance there if he can't have people stand infront of him.

 

Can you tell me how a muzzle will stop him chasing people on bikes?

 

ETA... Lee I have been reading your posts on here again and I am slightly worried about some of your other comments like...

 

Quote.

"its very rare his out with his muzzle off"

 

"when someone or something approachs i put his lead back on and grab his collar for the best control you can get"

 

Now dont get me wrong, I have had plenty of dealings with dogs that are a handfull, some change and some are programed that way and have a place in this world. But I ask you again, should a dog that "its very rare his out with his muzzle off" be on the tow path attracting dramas, and that is what it is, your dog will attract trouble.

Edited June 17, 2009 by O'Mali

[stort_mark]

Oh.... Stort Marks gone quiet.

Oh give me a break, ffs.

What was originally said, and which I disagreed with, was the sentence "I think the last time I looked at the DDA it does have a mention of livestock. It is in the section where police dogs are mentioned I think, but not other dogs."

 

Let's just reiterate this one more time. There is NO mention in the Dangerous Dogs Act of livestock, police dogs, prairie dogs, meerkats, wolves, plankton or any other kind of animals. None. Please don't quote and list other DEFRA documents or "Guides to Big Fierce Animals That Start With the Letter 'D'" or anything else. None of these are the Dangerous Dogs Act.

You can't just say something is in X and then when told it isn't, try and use the fact that it is mentioned in Y as the proof.

 

What was that about crap people write in forums or something .....

Stand by that. In fact, I stand by it even more, largely for the reason explained just a few mm above.

 

On the other point, I'm a bit reluctant to spend time debating the point with someone who believes that dogs have been domesticated over just "hundreds of years".

 

Actually I don't disagree with O'Mali (just the statement about the DDA!) and subsequent posts by the OP have turned my sympathies away from the OP and more towards Carl's views. Especially now we have the revelations that the Rottweiler is OK when muzzled, you're stationary and not straight ahead. This doesn't seem to be a "wolf legacy" thing.

Edited June 17, 2009 by stort_mark