Dogs and Old Men!

[Nightwatch]

 

 

If don't think your dog should be on a lead all the time, make an arrangement with a private land-owner to allow your dog to run free. If you are not prepared to do that, you shouldn't own a dog.

Are you being serious?

[canaldrifter]

I have an 8 year old son with a six year old scar, caused by an unrestrained dog that had "never done anything like that before"

 

I also have a 14 year old dog with a 11 year old stump, where his leg used to be, before the dog, whose owner shouted "It's okay, he only wants to play!", bit it off.

 

You'll appreciate that, if you can't be arsed to keep your dog out of my space, I will, regardless of any assurances of its "friendliness".

 

I don't want your dog close enough to "sniff my dog's arse" and, as to your threats of violent retribution, well I will deal with that, if it should arise.

 

I have said that I would not take pleasure in dealing with a dog, whose owner is too arrogant and ignorant to appreciate the wishes of others, but I also hope your dog never has the misfortune to meet the one that attacked mine.

 

I am fairly sure that, if my dog had been off the lead and not within my immediate proximity, it wouldn't have survived the attack. Fortunately I was close enough to beat the other dog off, before any other damage was caused.

 

You are the one who brought this thread in to the realms of proffered violence my friend.

 

Of course there are those who keep dogs as friends and companions and those who keep dogs as an extension of their own nasty little egos.

 

What is your space? The whole towpath?

 

I find your responses totally arrogant, aggressive and unbelievable in fact. So there let it end. There are better things to post about and far more pleasant dog walkers (on and off leads) to meet.

 

Tone

Edited September 12, 2010 by canaldrifter

[Mac of Cygnet]

 

 

I like dogs, but believe all dogs should be on a short lead when in a public place.

 

If don't think your dog should be on a lead all the time, make an arrangement with a private land-owner to allow your dog to run free. If you are not prepared to do that, you shouldn't own a dog.

 

You appear to think that the only alternative to being on a short lead is "running free". Unfortunately this is often the case with dogs that have had no degree of training, but a properly trained dog does not have to be on a lead. I have no hesitation in having my dog accompany me leadless through the busiest city streets, across roads, through fields of stock, or any other public place. I'll put her on a lead if requested by notice or verbally, out of consideration for the requester. Incidentally, these extending leads are pointless: either a dog is on a lead or not.

 

Mac

Edited September 12, 2010 by Mac of Cygnet

[Timleech]

You appear to think that the only alternative to being on a short lead is "running free". Unfortunately this is often the case with dogs that have had no degree of training, but a properly trained dog does not have to be on a lead. I have no hesitation in having my dog accompany me leadless through the busiest city streets, across roads, through fields of stock, or any other public place. I'll put her on a lead if requested by notice or verbally. Incidentally, these extending leads are pointless: either a dog is on a lead or not.

 

Mac

 

Unfortunately it's impossible to tell whether an approaching dog is properly trained or not, until maybe too late. There are far too many untrained dogs around, and all but the most thoroughly trained and placid definitely should always be on a lead in a public place IMO.

 

Tim

[dor]

You appear to think that the only alternative to being on a short lead is "running free". Unfortunately this is often the case with dogs that have had no degree of training, but a properly trained dog does not have to be on a lead. I have no hesitation in having my dog accompany me leadless through the busiest city streets, across roads, through fields of stock, or any other public place. I'll put her on a lead if requested by notice or verbally, out of consideration for the requester. Incidentally, these extending leads are pointless: either a dog is on a lead or not.

 

I have no doubt of your own sincerity. You also appear to have a responsible attitude towards keeping a dog. But unfortunately I, and others, have heard the same before being bitten by such a dog. What next - a child's face? Will you then say "Oh, he's never done that before?

 

Not everyone likes dogs. It shouldn't be their problem. I love to see well-behaved, well trained dogs. But how do you, or any one else, know if a dog you see bounding towards you will just stop and smile at you?

[Barry]

You are the one who brought this thread in to the realms of proffered violence my friend.

 

Of course there are those who keep dogs as friends and companions and those who keep dogs as an extension of their own nasty little egos.

 

What is your space? The whole towpath?

 

I find your responses totally arrogant, aggressive and unbelievable in fact. So there let it end. There are better things to post about and far more pleasant dog walkers (on and off leads) to meet.

 

Tone

 

 

canaldrifter I have to disagree with you entirely. If the definition of arrogance is the total belief that your way is the correct way then you are just as arrogant as you believe Carl to be.

 

He has said quite plainly that the only bit of space he is interested in is the bit he and his dog/family are in and of course he has the right to defend them if he believes they are under threat. His experience shows that uncontrolled dogs are a danger - is he wrong in that? Plainly not

 

Certainly, you attack my bitch and you will receive the full benefit of my attention and follow her into the cut. So who's the real twat?

 

This was the first post that had any hint of violence in it and it was yours

 

Should the debate end because you decide it should? I think not - another demonstration of an arrogant attitude I believe

 

 

Your post is a fine example of stomping off in a huff though

[Ray T]

[/qoute] If don't think your dog should be on a lead all the time, make an arrangement with a private land-owner to allow your dog to run free. If you are not prepared to do that, you shouldn't own a dog.

 

 

We can't let Millie the Mutt (Jack Russel Terrier) off the lead as she is deaf and we have no means of recall.

 

We have taught her sign language for various commands but like most terrier type dogs if she gets it into her head to chase something she would be off.

 

No amount of arm waving, gestulating would get her back.

 

So when out on a walk Millie is always on the lead.

 

We have yet to find a farmer / land owner with a secure field where we could run her and goodness knows we have tried.

Edited September 12, 2010 by Ray T

[Allan(nb Albert)]

Too many dogs, and in particular too many dog 'owners' who don't take their responsibilities seriously and don't believe or understand what any dog might do in the 'wrong' circumstances. The 'my pooch is perfect' syndrome.

 

Tim

 

Hi Tim

 

I have just shown your post to my daughter who is a professional dog trainer. She works for Dogs for the Disabled, training assistance dogs for families with autistic children.

 

She says if dogs took their responsibilities seriously or then she would be out of a job!

[canaldrifter]

canaldrifter I have to disagree with you entirely. If the definition of arrogance is the total belief that your way is the correct way then you are just as arrogant as you believe Carl to be.

 

He has said quite plainly that the only bit of space he is interested in is the bit he and his dog/family are in and of course he has the right to defend them if he believes they are under threat. His experience shows that uncontrolled dogs are a danger - is he wrong in that? Plainly not

 

 

 

This was the first post that had any hint of violence in it and it was yours

 

Should the debate end because you decide it should? I think not - another demonstration of an arrogant attitude I believe

 

 

Your post is a fine example of stomping off in a huff though

 

 

 

 

Posted Today, 09:55 AM

 

View Postcanaldrifter, on 12 September 2010 - 08:38 AM, said:

 

What I don't agree with is others making up rules for me to obey because that is what they think I should be doing. Thus, I'm proud to be a twat, and in fact have medals for it.

 

 

I couldn't agree more which is why, if someone is reserving their right to not have their dog under control, I reserve my right to remove it from my proximity, by whatever means necessary and, when you are fishing your dog out of the cut, we can share a mutual sense of brotherhood, as we retain our individual rights to be twats, in each others eyes.

 

Is that not violence then?

 

I'm not stomping off. I just don't waste my time talking to ego twats.

Tonr

[Timleech]

Hi Tim

 

I have just shown your post to my daughter who is a professional dog trainer. She works for Dogs for the Disabled, training assistance dogs for families with autistic children.

 

She says if dogs took their responsibilities seriously or then she would be out of a job!

 

 

Would you like to rephrase that, I'm not sure what you (or she) were trying to say ?

 

Tim

[carlt]

You are the one who brought this thread in to the realms of proffered violence my friend.

 

Of course there are those who keep dogs as friends and companions and those who keep dogs as an extension of their own nasty little egos.

 

What is your space? The whole towpath?

 

I find your responses totally arrogant, aggressive and unbelievable in fact. So there let it end. There are better things to post about and far more pleasant dog walkers (on and off leads) to meet.

 

Tone

Actually it was the OP who first mentioned violence, towards the dog owner.

 

I said that, though I blame the inconsiderate owner for the dog being uncontrolled, I would remove the immediate threat by removing the dog from my vicinity.

 

I'm not sure which part of what I have said you think is a lie but I assure you I have fended off unwanted attention from dogs, whose owners are too selfish to control to control them and I also have a three legged dog, the victim of someone with the same attitude as yours.

 

I do not know you, or your dog, so if it does impose itself on me, or mine, it will be fended off, forcibly, if necessary.

 

Should this occur then the fault will lie with the selfish, ignorant, inconsiderate attitude of the owner. The dog merely a victim of poor training and lack of restraint.

 

As i have said, my dog is on a leash, on the tow path, not just because I am not inconsiderate enough to impose him on people who may not want them bothering them, but also so he is close enough to protect, from dogs like the one that removed his leg.

 

You, apparently, don't seem bothered enough to protect your dog, from such a threat.

 

 

 

I couldn't agree more which is why, if someone is reserving their right to not have their dog under control, I reserve my right to remove it from my proximity, by whatever means necessary and, when you are fishing your dog out of the cut, we can share a mutual sense of brotherhood, as we retain our individual rights to be twats, in each others eyes.

 

Is that not violence then?

 

I'm not stomping off. I just don't waste my time talking to ego twats.

 

Actually it is self defence and I am more than happy to introduce my dog, and family, to a dog that is properly under control.

 

I would of course gently fend an unrestrained dog away but, if it persisted in imposing itself, then it would be removed more firmly.

 

As for "ego twats" this forum has spent many years mercifully free from, possibly, the biggest ego on the waterways internet community.

 

Lets hope it doesn't drag this great forum down, like so many people have said has happened, on other sites.

Edited September 12, 2010 by carlt

[mayalld]

Actually it was the OP who first mentioned violence, towards the dog owner.

 

I said that, though I blame the inconsiderate owner for the dog being uncontrolled, I would remove the immediate threat by removing the dog from my vicinity.

 

I'm not sure which part of what I have said you think is a lie but I assure you I have fended off unwanted attention from dogs, whose owners are too selfish to control to control them and I also have a three legged dog, the victim of someone with the same attitude as yours.

 

I do not know you, or your dog, so if it does impose itself on me, or mine, it will be fended off, forcibly, if necessary.

 

Should this occur then the fault will lie with the selfish, ignorant, inconsiderate attitude of the owner. The dog merely a victim of poor training and lack of restraint.

 

As i have said, my dog is on a leash, on the tow path, not just because I am not inconsiderate enough to impose him on people who may not want them bothering them, but also so he is close enough to protect, from dogs like the one that removed his leg.

 

You, apparently, don't seem bothered enough to protect your dog, from such a threat.

 

 

Actually it is self defence and I am more than happy to introduce my dog, and family, to a dog that is properly under control.

 

I would of course gently fend an unrestrained dog away but, if it persisted in imposing itself, then it would be removed more firmly.

 

As for "ego twats" this forum has spent many years mercifully free from, possibly, the biggest ego on the waterways internet community.

 

Lets hope it doesn't drag this great forum down, like so many people have said has happened, on other sites.

 

Well said Carl.

[cotswoldsman]

Speaking as a twat (but not that one) my bitch, (tiz the only word for her), is rarely on a lead on the towpath. She will woof at other dogs, but never bites. That's why I don't bother putting her on a lead unless we are near a road, open garden, cat, BBQ or cow shit. (She loves to roll in cow shit).

 

If someone else puts their dog on a lead on approach, I assume that they have the ferocious werewolf. My bitch will only sniff its bum anyway.

 

What I don't agree with is others making up rules for me to obey because that is what they think I should be doing. Thus, I'm proud to be a twat, and in fact have medals for it.

 

Tone

Commodore of Twat Squadron

 

Why should anyone have to put up with your dog wandering the towpath out of control. Dogs on the towpath should be on a lead there are people and children that do not like dogs why should we be subjected to your bitch out of control. To me dog owners who are considerate to other people keep there dogs on a lead

[saltysplash]

Well said Carl.

 

 

Steady now dave,

lets not have too much of this type of thing

[alan_fincher]

If someone else puts their dog on a lead on approach, I assume that they have the ferocious werewolf. My bitch will only sniff its bum anyway.

Pretty dumb assumption.....

 

Let me tell you then, if you see us approaching with our dog on a lead the major reason why this is so.

 

He is a rescue dog, and although we have been very successful with many elements of his training, he is still not fully reliable about recalling, particularly if an unexpected event like a rabbit or deer crossing his path occurs. He will ignore at least 95% of swans, ducks, geese, moor-hens, but still decide he wants to take on the odd one.

 

So he is on a lead, if you meet him.

 

It doesn't make him the hound of the Baskervilles, and I get mightily pissed off when someone's hound about three times his size decides to start leaping all over him, while it's owner thinks it's a jolly good laugh.

 

Unfortunately there are lots of twats in life, and some of them own big and/or uncontrolled dogs. Sadly the worst dog owners on canals often seem to live on boats, it seems to me.

[Allan(nb Albert)]

Would you like to rephrase that, I'm not sure what you (or she) were trying to say ?

 

Tim

 

I think the problem was with what you were trying to say - too many owners do not take their responsibilities seriously - and I would agree with that.

 

However, it came across to both myself and my daughter that you were also suggesting that dogs also have a sense of responsibility -

 

Too many dogs, ........ don't take their responsibilities seriously ......

[Timleech]

........... it came across to both myself and my daughter that you were also suggesting that dogs also have a sense of responsibility -

 

Too many dogs, ........ don't take their responsibilities seriously ......

 

 

Maybe half the trouble is that some dog owners do believe that dogs have a sense of responsibility

 

Tim

[carlt]

I think the problem was with what you were trying to say - too many owners do not take their responsibilities seriously - and I would agree with that.

 

However, it came across to both myself and my daughter that you were also suggesting that dogs also have a sense of responsibility -

 

Too many dogs, ........ don't take their responsibilities seriously ......

The dogs for autistic kids bit interested me...do you have a link to the organisation your daughter works for?

[Allan(nb Albert)]

The dogs for autistic kids bit interested me...do you have a link to the organisation your daughter works for?

 

Hi Carl

 

It is called Dogs for the Disabled

 

Boaters in the Banbury area may see trainers and dogs in Spiceball Park or the shopping centre.

 

Dogs for the Disabled have been training assistance dogs for about 20 years. However, "autism dogs" is a fairly new departure for them having been pioneered in America.

 

PM me if you want any more info.

[Natalie Graham]

Why should anyone have to put up with your dog wandering the towpath out of control. Dogs on the towpath should be on a lead there are people and children that do not like dogs why should we be subjected to your bitch out of control. To me dog owners who are considerate to other people keep there dogs on a lead

 

A dog doesn't need to be on a lead to be under control. Not if it is trained properly.

 

I don't see why dog owners or anyone else should be expected to pander to other people's likes and dislikes.

 

 

[mayalld]

A dog doesn't need to be on a lead to be under control. Not if it is trained properly.

 

I don't see why dog owners or anyone else should be expected to pander to other people's likes and dislikes.

 

 

 

OK, let us explore this for a moment...

 

It isn't about pandering to other people's likes and dislikes. It is about NOT imposing your dog on other people.

 

In general, dogs are in the habit of sniffing the arse of other dogs. It is common that dogs that are on a lead become unsettled when a dog that is not on a lead comes trying to sniff (the dog on a lead feels threatened, because it isn't able to move as it would like).

 

So, in order for your dog to be "under control" when not on a lead, you must be certain that it will NOT approach other dogs or humans AT ALL. It isn't sufficient that it will come back to you if called. By that time, it will already have caused a problem.

 

I am utterly sick of inconsiderate idiots with dogs off the lead assuring me that it is my problem that my dogs are getting excited, not their dog's fault. No, my dogs were fine until your not-on-the-lead dog invaded their space. I also notice that those whose dogs are not on the lead manage to not notice that the dog is 20 yards behind them crapping all over the place.

[Ray T]

"I also notice that those whose dogs are not on the lead manage to not notice that the dog is 20 yards behind them crapping all over the place. "

 

Oh how true Dave.

 

One interesting point however, on the way to the marina where our boat is we pass riding stables. There is always horse crap on various bits of the road, some times can't help but drive though / over it.

 

Never seen a rider dismount and pick up what its horse has done.

 

I will quote Joan Rivers again. "How can you respect an animal that craps while it walks, even chipmunks pull over".

Edited September 13, 2010 by Ray T

[carlt]

 

Never seen a rider dismount and pick up what its horse has done.

 

I recall, when I was a child, the "rag and bone" man, coming down our street, with his horse and cart, shouting "Reeaaaags and Bowunes! Owwld Ayeeeun!"

 

Whenever his horse did a poo he'd jump down and shovel it into a bag and a sign, on the back of the cart, said "Fertiliser for roses, 10p a bag."

[haggis]

OK, let us explore this for a moment...

 

 

I am utterly sick of inconsiderate idiots with dogs off the lead assuring me that it is my problem that my dogs are getting excited, not their dog's fault. No, my dogs were fine until your not-on-the-lead dog invaded their space. I also notice that those whose dogs are not on the lead manage to not notice that the dog is 20 yards behind them crapping all over the place.

 

I agree wholeheartedly. "My dog only wants to play" "my dog only wants to say hello" "my dog only wants to sniff your dogs bum" all result in the other persons dog invading my dogs space and I must admit that I do nothing to stop my dogs from retaliating as they think best - usually by giving a warning bark or growl. If the owner of the invading dog acts surprised at my lack of reaction (I don't give my dogs a telling off, for example) I explain that my dogs, not unnaturally do NOT like their space being invaded. I then ask how they, the owner, would feel if a person walking past them started touching them and sniffing their bum!

One of my dogs is a rescue and when I got her she had a fear of ALL other dogs and would, if given the chance run for home rather than walk past. She more than likely got this fear by the unwanted attention of other dogs with owners who made one of the above comments. I am glad to say that she is now much better as she now knows that I will protect her by placing myself between her and other dogs if she looks worried.

haggis

Edited September 13, 2010 by haggis

[carlt]

I agree wholeheartedly. "My dog only wants to play" "my dog only wants to say hello" "my dog only wants to sniff your dogs bum"

or "Oh he won't bite...He just wants to lick your child's face."

 

That would be just after he has sniffed another dog's bum and licked his own bollocks, then....Lovely!

Edited September 13, 2010 by carlt