# Beagle killed in dog attack



## picaresque (Jun 25, 2009)

Warning - very upsetting
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co...ews/owner-dogs-killed-beagle-salford-13945497
Chester the beagle was out with his dog walker when it happened. One of the dogs involved was a Bully Kutta, the other apparently a Ridgeback/Staffie cross. I don't mean to demonise breeds but I have to wonder why anyone in this country wants or needs a Bully Kutta. Certainly this guy had no control over either of his dogs. 
I know these things happen every now and then but this incident just seems particularly nasty. Poor little dog.


----------



## XemzX (Dec 23, 2013)

Very sad news to read.  
I have to agree with you about bully kuttas too. I recall first reading about them on a thread on here a couple of years ago and to be honest it did make scared of what they could be like in the wrong hands.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

I started to watch a bit of the video that was posted (no idea why I did  ) .... it was horrific, I have never seen anything like it (thankfully).

The owner of the attacking dogs said in one report that the beagle came over to his on lead dogs & tried to take their ball but in the video all the dogs were off lead ... & even so the attack that was shown was far beyond anything that would justify what happened. That poor dog & his owners must be devastated


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

I saw this on FB the other day 

FWIW That dog looks more Corso than Kutta but breeds are irrelevant...the owner had zero control over them, and as neither had collars on I'm not sure he wanted control  
The poor Beagles owners must be devastated


----------



## Burrowzig (Feb 18, 2009)

With Bully Kuttas, there must be a case for BSL. There's no justification for that sort of dog in a small, crowded island. And the owner of the attacking dogs said he'd had them both from puppies, yet the Bully Kutta's ears are cropped so it must have been old enough to import like that.


----------



## Boxerluver30 (Jun 14, 2017)

Horrible, RIP Chester 

Did anyone else notice the first comment below the article saying the dogs have attacked before? Wonder if that is true? I didn't watch the video however I saw pics and yes neither of the dogs had collars so he cant have had that much control. Poor owners


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

Burrowzig said:


> With Bully Kuttas, there must be a case for BSL. There's no justification for that sort of dog in a small, crowded island. And the owner of the attacking dogs said he'd had them both from puppies, yet the Bully Kutta's ears are cropped so it must have been old enough to import like that.


The DDA would be more relevant tbh...although this owner will probably be charged under BSL as well.


----------



## Guest (Nov 24, 2017)

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co...ews/owner-dogs-killed-beagle-salford-13945497 Notice how he said sorry but. Clearly no control over his 2 dogs.


----------



## Guest (Nov 24, 2017)

Boxerluver30 said:


> Horrible, RIP Chester
> 
> Did anyone else notice the first comment below the article saying the dogs have attacked before? Wonder if that is true? I didn't watch the video however I saw pics and yes neither of the dogs had collars so he cant have had that much control. Poor owners


I noticed that too. I also noticed the daily fail kept changing the 2 dogs breeds.


----------



## Burrowzig (Feb 18, 2009)

StormyThai said:


> The DDA would be more relevant tbh...although this owner will probably be charged under BSL as well.


BSL as it stands doesn't cover this case though. Bully Kuttas aren't currently on the banned list. I think if there has to be a list, they should be on it.
For sure he should be prosecuted under the DDA.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

Just reading this particular article & it says they were on lead but pulled away .... where are the leads trailing then? If he is asthmatic & not in the best of health as he seems to claim then why have two such powerful breeds & why walk them together ....,

He should be prosecuted, no question


----------



## dorrit (Sep 13, 2011)

Almost every website offering info on these bully kutta's says they are dog aggressive and used for fighting... I have seen videos where it takes two grown men to hold one back from attacking another dog. There is no need for such a dog in a family home. I also noticed the cropped ears which contradicts the owners statement that he had had the dog since a puppy , (although define puppy he could mean 9 months )

A sad case all round one dog is dead two other face the death sentence and why??.....Human error, human ego, human carelessness


----------



## Teddy-dog (Nov 2, 2017)

It's such a horrible, tragic story  I can't even think of it too much as it makes me feel awful what that beagle must have gone through, and the people who witnessed it 

One of the dogs definitely has cropped ears, so has he had it since a puppy? If so he can't have got it from anywhere reputable? I haven't watched the video, I don't think I could, but the pictures are bad too  The dogs don't have collars and it looks like they have slip leads in his hands, so how can the dogs have pulled away from him and lost their slip leads?

I don't know, I don't want to speculate too much but it's hard to imagine a little beagle would do something to illicit two dogs mauling him to death... I can understand a dog not liking him and having a snap or something but it seemed these dogs had intent 

ETA: I'm not blaming the dogs. They only know what they know. It's the owner that's to blame really. He should have been in control of his dogs.


----------



## Guest (Nov 24, 2017)

Cleo38 said:


> Just reading this particular article & it says they were on lead but pulled away .... where are the leads trailing then? If he is asthmatic & not in the best of health as he seems to claim then why have two such powerful breeds & why walk them together ....,
> 
> He should be prosecuted, no question


Totally agree. I just noticed too that the link I posted is the same one that OP posted lol.


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

I call BS on those dogs never being an issue before too...dogs don't just jump from being friendly family pets to killing and mauling another dog...there had to be issues that were ignored IMHO


----------



## Boxerluver30 (Jun 14, 2017)

Me thinks this guy is telling a few porkies trying to cover his back a bit. I couldn't see the dogs wearing collars in the pics I saw so whether they were on lead is questionable unless it was maybe slip leads.


----------



## Boxerluver30 (Jun 14, 2017)

Oh just noticed he had slip leads in his hands


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

Boxerluver30 said:


> Me thinks this guy is telling a few porkies trying to cover his back a bit. I couldn't see the dogs wearing collars in the pics I saw so whether they were on lead is questionable unless it was maybe slip leads.


The owner was carrying both collars in his hands...they could have slipped their collars I suppose.


----------



## Guest (Nov 24, 2017)

Boxerluver30 said:


> Me thinks this guy is telling a few porkies trying to cover his back a bit. I couldn't see the dogs wearing collars in the pics I saw so whether they were on lead is questionable unless it was maybe slip leads.


My thoughts exactly regarding telling porkies.


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

Burrowzig said:


> BSL as it stands doesn't cover this case though. Bully Kuttas aren't currently on the banned list. I think if there has to be a list, they should be on it.
> For sure he should be prosecuted under the DDA.


Oh it will...I can pretty much guarantee that both dogs will be typed.


----------



## Teddy-dog (Nov 2, 2017)

Is it not law to have a collar and ID tag on a dog in a public place anyway now? So regardless of slip lead/lead they should have had collars on. Maybe he then could have attempted to haul them off? But with two powerful breeds, it might not have made much difference...


----------



## Sproglet (Aug 25, 2017)

Poor poor dog and family. I couldn't watch the video, but did see the pictures. My heart goes out to the owners


----------



## BlueJay (Sep 20, 2013)

Obviously if the dogs aren't responding in the slightest to their owners shouts, walking away while they are so engaged in what they are doing is going to do _nothing._
They're not responding and you have no control whatsoever. You put those collars on - which shouldn't be off in the first place; is that not the law for all dogs anyways? - and you ******* choke those dogs out until they let go. You do NOT walk away and leave them to it.

He has the collars in his hands and walks away.
Whether he ran up to onlead dogs or not... that poor, poor beagle.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Burrowzig said:


> With Bully Kuttas, there must be a case for BSL.


So can you definately state that these were bully kuttas rather than some sort of "mix"? How do you define a breed? Any legal system would have to define a "type" as they currently do with "pitbulls". How many innocent, friendly dogs have been killed simply because of looks?

Breed Specific Legislation simply does not work and there is no justification for it.

Tragic incident and the attackers owner had no control over his dogs. The owners of the beagle must be devastated and my heart goes out to them.


----------



## Boxerluver30 (Jun 14, 2017)

DDA definitely

However BSL I'm not sure as neither of the dogs are banned breeds, although I suppose if they fit into the characteristics then they will be classed as them. It would be good if these dogs behaviour was studied to try figure out why they attacked so violently. There must have been something that triggered it, that was not a normal reaction towards chester


----------



## LinznMilly (Jun 24, 2011)

That whole article enfuriated me! Sorry the beagle got mauled? Ha! More like sorry he was caught and his dogs have been seized. The whole article was dripping with "pity me, poor me!" :Meh 

RIP beautiful Chester. Free from any suffering now. Deepest condolences to your devastated owners.


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

I saw this on FB and was sickened, surely this must be most dog owners worst nightmares. To be honest with you I don't think most dogs even large ones would stand a chance against this 'Bully Kutta'. How or why anyone would want to keep such a dog as a pet is beyond me. They are NOT pets.

I think the specifics of what led to this event were irrelevant. Equipment failure isn't an excuse. If you have big powerful aggressive dogs then equipment failure can't ever be an excuse. Yet another man using big powerful dogs he can't control to compensate for a lack of something.....ending in tragedy. People like this are the reason we'll end up like America with dogs banned from everywhere.


----------



## ShibaPup (Mar 22, 2017)

I think many molosser, primitive working breeds shouldn't be kept as pets or even working breeds - I'm talking breeds who haven't been kept as pets for a very long time, if at all. They're still used for the job they were bred for - guarding a flock from big predators in large remote areas is a very far cry from living in a built up town or city. Even herding sheep - for example collies from working farms, how many struggle in a town or city?

Chances are someone has probably had bad experiences with the guy and his dogs previously - even if reported, it seems like a lottery if it's followed up and anything done about it by the dog warden. Not even sure what powers they actually have.

Shocked that his dogs are quite young, one only being a year old! Don't understand why he didn't choke his dogs off? They're clearly far too aroused to listen, walking away achieves nothing and hitting/pulling only makes it worse.

BSL isn't the answer though - it's been proven that it simply doesn't work and is in fact dangerous. Making people think only certain breeds are dangerous which simply isn't true. Many, many, many innocent dogs have been killed purely because of their appearance alone - absolutely nothing to do with their behaviour! IMO that's sickening - judge a dog on their behaviour and past documented actions, not on how they look.

My thoughts are with Chester's owners.


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

RIP Chester, thinking of his family.


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

ShibaPup said:


> I think many molosser, primitive working breeds shouldn't be kept as pets or even working breeds - I'm talking breeds who haven't been kept as pets for a very long time, if at all. They're still used for the job they were bred for - guarding a flock from big predators in large remote areas is a very far cry from living in a built up town or city. Even herding sheep - for example collies from working farms, how many struggle in a town or city?
> 
> Chances are someone has probably had bad experiences with the guy and his dogs previously - even if reported, it seems like a lottery if it's followed up and anything done about it by the dog warden. Not even sure what powers they actually have.
> 
> ...


I would think unless the dog(s) could be choked off almost immediately it wouldn't have made difference either way, a Beagle sized dog wouldn't stand a chance. Plus there were two of them. One man attempting to choke off two attacking dogs, again, no chance. It was only going to end in tragedy.


----------



## Dogloverlou (Dec 8, 2013)

Horrific! I can't begin to imagine the terror experienced by the poor Beagle & the panic by all the owners/walkers concerned. It does appear the dogs maybe slipped the collar judging by the pictures, but I really don't buy that they'd never shown any dog aggression before. For that level of serious intent, those dogs were not friendly beforehand! Why would you even walk two powerful dogs such as these together in popular dog walking areas? I mean, even without this level of aggression I'd hasten to guess they're breeds predisposed to being a bit dog intolerant and not park going dogs at all.

I've never heard of a bully kutta before? Are we sure it's not a Dogo?


----------



## shinra (Aug 9, 2013)

dorrit said:


> I also noticed the cropped ears which contradicts the owners statement that he had had the dog since a puppy , (although define puppy he could mean 9 months )
> 
> A sad case all round one dog is dead two other face the death sentence and why??.....Human error, human ego, human carelessness


I doubt the guy imported it, peopl crudely crop their dogs ears all the time in this country. Going by the area it's rife with these type of dogs for fighting anyway. 
Easily done with scissors when they're puppies, it's disgusting.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse (Feb 9, 2014)

I'm not going to watch the video, I've read about it and my heart breaks thinking of the terror the poor beagle must have gone through and the grief of his owners must be overwhelming. Out of interest who filmed the incident?


----------



## Dogloverlou (Dec 8, 2013)

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I'm not going to watch the video, I've read about it and my heart breaks thinking of the terror the poor beagle must have gone through and the grief of his owners must be overwhelming. Out of interest who filmed the incident?


I thought that too & assumed it was the Beagle's walker. Must admit, that would be the last thing on my mind!


----------



## SusieRainbow (Jan 21, 2013)

It was the dog walker apparently which I find rather odd. I'd be too busy filling my pants !


----------



## rottiepointerhouse (Feb 9, 2014)

Dogloverlou said:


> I thought that too & assumed it was the Beagle's walker. Must admit, that would be the last thing on my mind!





SusieRainbow said:


> It was the dog walker apparently which I find rather odd. I'd be too busy filling my pants !


Thank you. It would be the last thing on my mind too as I'd be in there trying to strangle them with my leads but I suppose it was quick thinking to get the evidence.


----------



## ShibaPup (Mar 22, 2017)

Yeah it was the dog walker - she was walking 5 dogs at the time.

"I was shouting to Chester to come and I looked up and saw two big dogs with something between them. I just knew. I screamed.

I clipped the other dogs to a railing and ran to Chester. He was in the middle of the field being pulled all over the place. The little boy was being torn to pieces."

- Janet Payne
Janet tried to intervene, begging the man walking the mastiffs to help. But, she says, the only thing he said was:


"why the **ck wasn't your dog on a lead"

- Dogs' owner
After around 30 seconds, Chester was dead.​
Janet added:

"At one point the white dog looked at me and I thought I was for it, but he went back to Chester. Then the man managed to get him off and left the other dog with me as he walked off calling for it every now and then.

Eventually the blood-covered dog ran after him, he didn't even look back.

He just left me screaming in horror with the poor lifeless boy at my feet."

- Janet Payne
Janet called the police and her partner, Gary, a 28-year-old a project manager for Barclays rushed to the scene and found his dog mauled to death on the grass.​
http://www.itv.com/news/granada/2017-11-23/two-dogs-seized-by-cops-after-horrific-beagle-death/


----------



## picaresque (Jun 25, 2009)

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I'm not going to watch the video, I've read about it and my heart breaks thinking of the terror the poor beagle must have gone through and the grief of his owners must be overwhelming. Out of interest who filmed the incident?


I saw some of the video on Mail Online (in their typical sensationalist style they had to include it) and it appears it was the dog walker filming, presumably to get evidence, capture the man's face etc. I had to turn it off as her sobbing (we can all imagine the state any of us would be in in the same circumstances) was so upsetting.


----------



## WillowT (Mar 21, 2015)

I haven’t watched the video and barely read the story but the headline says it all.
Hopefully these 2 dogs are put to sleep


----------



## Dogloverlou (Dec 8, 2013)

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Thank you. It would be the last thing on my mind too as I'd be in there trying to strangle them with my leads but I suppose it was quick thinking to get the evidence.


Same. Dangerous or not, I'd have been flinging myself at those dogs and doing everything in my power to help get them off. Blind rage and adrenaline would spur me on. The d*** owner himself had no chance of controlling and containing two large dogs in such a state, but maybe, just maybe, there might have been more of a chance with an additional pair of hands.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse (Feb 9, 2014)

Dogloverlou said:


> Same. Dangerous or not, I'd have been flinging myself at those dogs and doing everything in my power to help get them off. Blind rage and adrenaline would spur me on. The d*** owner himself had no chance of controlling and containing two large dogs in such a state, but maybe, just maybe, there might have been more of a chance with an additional pair of hands.


I'm pretty sure I would be doing the same for my own dogs but I do wonder if a dog walker with responsibility for 5 dogs would risk doing the same, I suppose in fairness she has to think about keeping those other dogs safe too and her ability to carry on working if she got a serious injury whereas when its our own dogs we tend to act on impulse and think about the dangers later. So very sad.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse (Feb 9, 2014)

Also can anyone who has been brave enough to watch the video tell me whether there appears to be anyone else around who might have been able to help?


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

Dogloverlou said:


> Same. Dangerous or not, I'd have been flinging myself at those dogs and doing everything in my power to help get them off. Blind rage and adrenaline would spur me on. The d*** owner himself had no chance of controlling and containing two large dogs in such a state, but maybe, just maybe, there might have been more of a chance with an additional pair of hands.


I agree & if it were my dog I would have found something to drag/beat those dogs off mine even if it meant killing them ....but easy to say I suppose & the poor woman may have been so shocked so physically unable to intervene & also concerned for her own safety. I must admit I found the video really horrific so to be actually there witnessing it must have just been so awful


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Also can anyone who has been brave enough to watch the video tell me whether there appears to be anyone else around who might have been able to help?


TBH it was so shocking that I really can't remember but it didn't look like it .....


----------



## picaresque (Jun 25, 2009)

I only saw a few seconds of the video but I assumed she'd started filming after the poor dog was already dead  So not just standing back and letting it happen.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse (Feb 9, 2014)

picaresque said:


> I only saw a few seconds of the video but I assumed she'd started filming after the poor dog was already dead  So not just standing back and letting it happen.


Yes from the write up of what she said it sounds like she called him and turned round to see him already being torn apart  I can't imagine how she or the owners will get over that.


----------



## Guest (Nov 24, 2017)

Ugh, not going to watch a video. Maybe it's a generational thing, but the last thing I would have thought to do while dealing with a life or death situation would be to pull my phone out and hit record....



ShibaPup said:


> Shocked that his dogs are quite young, one only being a year old! Don't understand why he didn't choke his dogs off? They're clearly far too aroused to listen, walking away achieves nothing and hitting/pulling only makes it worse.


There's a lot that defies understanding for sure, but as someone else already mentioned, the damage was probably done very quickly. Not to be morbid, but my great dane could dispatch a rabbit before the rabbit even had a chance to scream, it was *very* fast. My muttdog, half the size of a dane, has many a times killed prey so fast it was over before I even knew what had happened. One time while ON leash trotting next to me. We were out jogging (not very fast, but still, faster than a stroll) and he stuck his head in a clump of grass, came out with a skunk by the neck, shock it once and it was dead without either of us breaking stride, or me even realizing what had just happened. By the time I had "no! Drop!" out, the skunk was dead. And yes, still stunk :Bag

A dog intending to kill can do so very quickly. *That* the dog intended to kill is very concerning to say the least. Both dogs I described above who killed prey have also been in altercations with loose dogs and at most there might be a puncture wound. They never intended to kill or even hurt the other dog that badly.

My own personal opinion, there is no place in this world for a dog who thinks other dogs are meant to be killed. Normal dogs, even those who would kill your pet rabbit or even the family cat, also know that dogs are dogs, not prey. Every once in a blue moon you might have an incident of predatory drift, but even in those instances the dog is not looking at all dogs with intent to kill. Any dog who does is IMHO not fit, not sound, and best PTS. Especially if the owner is a dumbass.


----------



## HollyDolly (Sep 5, 2016)

There are a significant number of locals commenting online with their own experiences of this owner/these dogs -hopefully they will all go to the police and there will be enough evidence to show that this was not an isolated incident (as the owner suggests). That poor poor Beagle. Puts the fear of god in me for my little pooch.


----------



## Siskin (Nov 13, 2012)

Couldn't bear to watch the video, it was upsetting enough to see a picture of the white dog with blood over its head a shoulders. I feel so sorry for the owners who must be very traumatised, my heart goes out to them.

As to the filming. It's very easy to quickly use a phone to film an incident these days and if there was no helping poor Chester then filming the dogs and the owner for evidence was a useful thing to do, the police won't be able to ignore it and say they can't prosecute due to lack of evidence.


----------



## Dogloverlou (Dec 8, 2013)

Cleo38 said:


> I agree & if it were my dog I would have found something to drag/beat those dogs off mine even if it meant killing them ....but easy to say I suppose & the poor woman may have been so shocked so physically unable to intervene & also concerned for her own safety. I must admit I found the video really horrific so to be actually there witnessing it must have just been so awful


Yes, panic & shock can also make people freeze of course, so could be the walker was just unable to do anything. Plus, it all happened so fast no doubt.
I only saw one short clip of the guy walking off from the dogs. Really don't want to watch the full video


----------



## 3dogs2cats (Aug 15, 2012)

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Also can anyone who has been brave enough to watch the video tell me whether there appears to be anyone else around who might have been able to help?


 There is nobody else on the video but of course there could have been other people around just not seen on the video. The video is short and in my opinion, judging by the state of the attacking dogs, the poor beagle was already dead and the video was taken for evidence. This is devastating, poor beagle I just keep hoping it was very quick and his suffering short.


----------



## Westie Mum (Feb 5, 2015)

My heart goes out to poor Chester and his owners. Completely devestating  I can't even begin to imagine what it would be like to know that happened to your dog and then to see what's left of him ..... honestly feel so sad for them 



Dogloverlou said:


> Same. Dangerous or not, I'd have been flinging myself at those dogs and doing everything in my power to help get them off. Blind rage and adrenaline would spur me on. The d*** owner himself had no chance of controlling and containing two large dogs in such a state, but maybe, just maybe, there might have been more of a chance with an additional pair of hands.





rottiepointerhouse said:


> I'm pretty sure I would be doing the same for my own dogs but I do wonder if a dog walker with responsibility for 5 dogs would risk doing the same, I suppose in fairness she has to think about keeping those other dogs safe too and her ability to carry on working if she got a serious injury whereas when its our own dogs we tend to act on impulse and think about the dangers later. So very sad.


I think most owners would have a natural instinct to do something, anything, to try to stop it, no matter how much danger they put themselves in. But I don't think a dog walker necessarily would (debate probably for another thread) but filming it would be the last thing on my mind, my hands wouldn't have been steady enough anyway !


----------



## Burrowzig (Feb 18, 2009)

Dogloverlou said:


> I've never heard of a bully kutta before?


Remember @Dogless on here, who has 2 Ridgebacks but hasn't been on since the server was changed? She said she came across the breed when in Afghanistan (I think it was) in the army, and she said they were really scary.



WillowT said:


> Hopefully these 2 dogs are put to sleep


The world will certainly be a better place without them. As to their owner......


----------



## Lexiedhb (Jun 9, 2011)

This is just hideous, and so easily avoided with a muzzle/ decent equipment. You can't tell me that was the first time these dogs had reacted badly to another, unless there's some bizarre neurological unknown issue. 
RIP little beagle


----------



## ShibaPup (Mar 22, 2017)

On Jo-Rosie's FB page - she's told different events to what the newspapers are posting.

"Interesting to see how many people went for the throat of the guy with the dogs that killed the beagle.

I found it fascinating the amount of owners suggesting their reactive dogs shouldn't wear muzzles because the dogs wouldn't be able to defend themselves if another dog approached in a threatening way, or that muzzles were silly because 1/10000 dogs can still catch and get a nip in through the open bars of a Baskerville...

*The guy with the dogs was a regular owner of two large dogs. He had them on lead. When the offlead beagle approached he asked the walker to recall it and put it on a lead but she couldn't. By then it had attempted to take one dogs ball, the dogs had slipped their collars and the dogs had killed the beagle. *

A tragedy which will no doubt end up in the death of three well loved pets. A tragedy which could have been easily managed with one little tool - the muzzle. Here is Nando playing some awesome muzzle games with Fizz. If there is a chance your dog might react to another dog or puppy: muzzle up in public open spaces."​



__ https://www.facebook.com/Archiesuperpit/posts/1880062765657194


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

ShibaPup said:


> On Jo-Rosie's FB page - she's told different events to what the newspapers are posting.
> 
> "Interesting to see how many people went for the throat of the guy with the dogs that killed the beagle.
> 
> ...


Wow.... seriously?! That was much, much more than telling off a dog who approached it or even went for his ball. I HATE offlead dogs bothering mine but unfortunately it happens & we as owners have to manage this at times ..... no dog should react like this regardless of what toy was being taken. A 'regular' owner with a BullyKutta ... I don't think so


----------



## Dogloverlou (Dec 8, 2013)

ShibaPup said:


> On Jo-Rosie's FB page - she's told different events to what the newspapers are posting.
> 
> "Interesting to see how many people went for the throat of the guy with the dogs that killed the beagle.
> 
> ...


For him to ask the walker to recall her dog suggests he knew his dogs were likely to not react kindly to it, which kind of rubbishes his claim they'd never shown any aggression before and had always been friendly towards other dogs. I'm sure we can all sympathise to some extent about being approached by a loose dog and the other owner unable to regain control. But who on earth would expect that level of aggression and serious intent from the dogs? For them to kill another dog is a serious over reaction and does signify the dogs are not mentally stable or safe. I would guess a large part is due to the breed...and I'm not one for maligning breeds at all. But from reading a bit of info about the bully kutta they're in no way pet material, especially in this country with our urban lifestyles etc.

It's just tragic all round


----------



## Siskin (Nov 13, 2012)

I also find it somewhat odd that both the dogs managed to slip their so easily and at the same time. Have they got slippery heads or something


----------



## BlueJay (Sep 20, 2013)

Guy has what looks like a ball chucker, so they were off lead at some point, even if they did slip those huge collars.

I've never understood the reasoning of the dog not being able to defend itself for refusing to muzzle
1) You're not turning the dog loose into the wild. It doesn't need to defend itself.
2) Dogs wearing muzzles usually have responsible owners; that owner is not likely to be too far away if any defensible situation arises.
3) Its a darn sight easier to get one dog off another without two sets of teeth to deal with!!


----------



## ShibaPup (Mar 22, 2017)

I'm in no way defending what the dogs did! The dogs should be humanely euthanised and charges brought against the owner under the DDA IMO.


----------



## Dogloverlou (Dec 8, 2013)

Siskin said:


> I also find it somewhat odd that both the dogs managed to slip their so easily and at the same time. Have they got slippery heads or something


They was probably very loose and ill fitted to begin with.


----------



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

It is a horrifying story and the video is spine chilling. Scary to think it could happen to any of us in the wrong place at the wrong time. I am firmly of the belief that there is no place for such powerful, aggressive breeds/type of dogs in the UK. They inevitably attract a certain kind of owner - usually the type who should not even own a goldfish!

Poor Chester and his owners. I can only imagine the heartbreak they are suffering knowing how their gentle family dog met such a brutal end. Awful. The dogs should be euthanised and the owner charged under the DDA - no doubts in my mind.


----------



## Burrowzig (Feb 18, 2009)

BlueJay said:


> *Guy has what looks like a ball chucker, so they were off lead at some point,* even if they did slip those huge collars.
> 
> I've never understood the reasoning of the dog not being able to defend itself for refusing to muzzle
> 1) You're not turning the dog loose into the wild. It doesn't need to defend itself.
> ...


The fact that the beagle went to the other dogs to play with their ball suggests the dogs were off lead. Who plays with a ball and chuckit with their dogs ON lead? And if they were on lead, why couldn't their owner turn and walk them away?


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I'm pretty sure I would be doing the same for my own dogs but I do wonder if a dog walker with responsibility for 5 dogs would risk doing the same, I suppose in fairness she has to think about keeping those other dogs safe too and her ability to carry on working if she got a serious injury whereas when its our own dogs we tend to act on impulse and think about the dangers later. So very sad.


I realise that dog walkers have a living to make but I feel one person to 5/6 dogs isnt enough .
I used to walk my own three dogs plus my friends and I realised that I could not protect them all so I stopped walking Harry .

TBH though , Ive pulled dogs off mine but no way would I be able to pull off bully type dogs. but no way would I let my dogs run up to other dogs especially not large ones.

Poor beagle and also the two dogs involved will spend months in kennels and then PTS.


----------



## Guest (Nov 24, 2017)

Cleo38 said:


> Wow.... seriously?! That was much, much more than telling off a dog who approached it or even went for his ball. I HATE offlead dogs bothering mine but unfortunately it happens & we as owners have to manage this at times ..... no dog should react like this regardless of what toy was being taken. A 'regular' owner with a BullyKutta ... I don't think so


That's weird, my alerts tell me you're quoting me here, which you clearly aren't. 
In any case, I agree with you. Bates hates rude dogs and is not above poking holes in another dog for rude behavior. The difference though is a) he gives plenty of fair warning (which gives me a chance to intervene) and b) when I do intervene, he defers to me and lets me handle it. 
Is it rude and unsafe to allow your dog to bound up to another dog especially one who's engaged in their own thing. Of course. Does it deserve a mauling? Absolutely not. No more than someone should get shot for cutting in line.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

Whilst I do agree that dogs that are likely to cause injury to other dogs or people inflict should be muzzled am not sure this would have been enough of a preventative measure for these two dogs Surely if they were that intent on killing the beagle (& the video seemed to show exactly that) & had already got free from their leads (supposedly) then surely a regular muzzle would not have been much of challenge for them to remove.


----------



## ShibaPup (Mar 22, 2017)

kimthecat said:


> I realise that dog walkers have a living to make but I feel one person to 5/6 dogs isnt enough .
> I used to walk my own three dogs plus my friends and I realised that I could not protect them all so I stopped walking Harry .
> 
> TBH though , Ive pulled dogs off mine but no way would I be able to pull off bully type dogs. but no way would I let my dogs run up to other dogs especially not large ones.
> ...


I'm not sure how it works now they've been seized - if he can sign them over to have them euthanised straight away? I've read online that the owner has said he would rehome them if they weren't euthanised because he couldn't walk them around the area again without getting abuse.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

ShibaPup said:


> I'm not sure how it works now they've been seized - if he can sign them over to have them euthanised straight away? I've read online that the owner has said he would rehome them if they weren't euthanised because he couldn't walk them around the area again without getting abuse.


Yes, I read that ... charming how he thought of how he would be treated after this rather than the poor couple who lost their dog


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

ouesi said:


> That's weird, my alerts tell me you're quoting me here, which you clearly aren't.
> In any case, I agree with you. Bates hates rude dogs and is not above poking holes in another dog for rude behavior. The difference though is a) he gives plenty of fair warning (which gives me a chance to intervene) and b) when I do intervene, he defers to me and lets me handle it.
> Is it rude and unsafe to allow your dog to bound up to another dog especially one who's engaged in their own thing. Of course. Does it deserve a mauling? Absolutely not. No more than someone should get shot for cutting in line.


Oh,sorry ... I did quote you then went to do something else, came back replied to someone else .... saw my post didn't make sense (no change there then!) edited out your quote so it made sense replying to @ShibaPup .... senior moments are getting more common now!


----------



## Doggiedelight (Jan 27, 2015)

How absolutely awful. After having lost pets this year, 1 in an horrific way. I know the sheer pain and anguish the owners of the beagle must be feeling!!! I hope, if not already as I havent scrolled the entire thread, that both dogs are out down and the owner prosecuted. 

Is there a video of the actual attack? Not that I want to see it but from peoples comments i expected to open the link and see a video of the attack and didnt xx


----------



## Dogloverlou (Dec 8, 2013)

Cleo38 said:


> Whilst I do agree that dogs that are likely to cause injury to other dogs or people inflict should be muzzled am not sure this would have been enough of a preventative measure for these two dogs Surely if they were that intent on killing the beagle (& the video seemed to show exactly that) & had already got free from their leads (supposedly) then surely a regular muzzle would not have been much of challenge for them to remove.


That's what I thought. Surely the power alone of the dogs could have caused serious injury and an improperly fitted muzzle is pretty easy for determined dogs to remove as you say.


----------



## Sproglet (Aug 25, 2017)

ShibaPup said:


> the owner has said he would rehome them if they weren't euthanised


I hope not!
Edited to add. They should never be re-homed after this.


----------



## Doggiedelight (Jan 27, 2015)

ShibaPup said:


> Yeah it was the dog walker - she was walking 5 dogs at the time.
> "I was shouting to Chester to come and I looked up and saw two big dogs with something between them. I just knew. I screamed.
> 
> I clipped the other dogs to a railing and ran to Chester. He was in the middle of the field being pulled all over the place. The little boy was being torn to pieces."
> ...


Police would have had to arrest to husband because he would have knocked 7 shades of shit out of the man!


----------



## CuddleMonster (Mar 9, 2016)

I can understand the dog walker not doing more - she had to think of the other dogs in her care, it sounded like it was too late for poor Chester anyway, and at least this way, there is evidence which should help ensure these dogs don't take another life.

The thing that really scared me was hearing this guy talk about how his little girl loved cuddling his dogs - so glad they will never be going back home as the thought of the doing something similar to a child... I haven't seen the film, but the article I read earlier this evening was full of him demanding sympathy for the trauma of losing his dogs and how badly it had affected his asthma. Very little sympathy for two devastated and traumatised dog owners and none at all for the dog walker - if I were her, I think it would destroy my business as I don't think I would ever be able to do a dog walk again. And those poor owners are never going to be able to think of their lovely dog again without remembering how he died. My heart breaks for them.


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

Cleo38 said:


> Wow.... seriously?! That was much, much more than telling off a dog who approached it or even went for his ball. I HATE offlead dogs bothering mine but unfortunately it happens & we as owners have to manage this at times ..... no dog should react like this regardless of what toy was being taken. A 'regular' owner with a BullyKutta ... I don't think so


I rolled my eyes the moment I saw who wrote this, as did you I'm sure!

How the hell did she know what happened? she wasn't there. And there are multiple accounts of people who walk in the same area who have had run in's or have had their dogs attacked by these dogs.

I also can't stand off lead dogs approaching us and while I can see why a fight could be the product of such a circumstance, especially with poor handling, there is a difference between a fight (which with most dogs will be noise and teeth clashing with not a lot of substance) and being mauled to death......

There is no way on this earth this was the first time they had shown aggression. Shit management killed all these dogs.


----------



## Zaros (Nov 24, 2009)

What an awful tragedy, and one that, IMO, could have so easily have been avoided.



ShibaPup said:


> I think many molosser, primitive working breeds shouldn't be kept as pets.
> .


And this is what?

Elicited from the consequences/actions of one grossly incompetent and irresponsible dog owner.
I find this remark quite offensive considering the nine years we've owned Zara and Oscar and no living creature, man nor beast, has fallen prey to either of them.
I'm astutely aware of their combined capabilities and often walk them by myself, but would never allow them both off their leash at the same time because I know it could be a recipe for disaster should another dog take a dislike to either one of them.

I, for one, am tired of hearing these types of dogs should not be kept as pets, when, given the right conditions/environment/surroundings, they make the most excellent pets.
Perhaps, for the safety of all, it's time Britain imposed more restrictions on the types of breeds that may be kept in certain areas under certain conditions.


----------



## ShibaPup (Mar 22, 2017)

labradrk said:


> *I rolled my eyes the moment I saw who wrote this, as did you I'm sure!*
> 
> How the hell did she know what happened? she wasn't there. And there are multiple accounts of people who walk in the same area who have had run in's or have had their dogs attacked by these dogs.
> 
> ...


Was that aimed at me?


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

ShibaPup said:


> Was that aimed at me?


Crossed wires .... no, not you at all


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

ShibaPup said:


> Was that aimed at me?


No, the original author


----------



## picaresque (Jun 25, 2009)

Who is this Jo-Rosie?


----------



## Sproglet (Aug 25, 2017)

Zaros said:


> I, for one, am tired of hearing these types of dogs should not be kept as pets, when, given the right conditions/environment/surroundings, they make the most excellent pets.


This is the problem though. Many people that buy this type of dog do not have the right type of home or experience to own them or get them as a status symbol, hence why this happens


----------



## Dogloverlou (Dec 8, 2013)

picaresque said:


> Who is this Jo-Rosie?


Nando's OH. A well respected trainer in her own right, but can't say I follow her or know anything about her beyond her association with Nando.


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

Zaros said:


> What an awful tragedy, and one that, IMO, could have so easily have been avoided.
> 
> And this is what?
> 
> ...


The difference is you have the right set up for your type of dogs. This reality is that in this country, the OVERWHELMING majority of people do have the set up and appropriate environment for dogs like that. Small island, small gardens, boxed in by neighbours on all sides, expecting dogs to walk through/cope with walking through busy towns/parks etc is the reality for more people than not.....

Restrictions don't work and in many cases can make a type of dog more desirable (case point with Pit Bulls). We don't need more restrictions but less idiots breeding these sorts of dogs and even fewer idiots buying them in the first place.


----------



## ShibaPup (Mar 22, 2017)

Zaros said:


> What an awful tragedy, and one that, IMO, could have so easily have been avoided.
> 
> And this is what?
> 
> ...


You do not live in a heavy urban area... Do you think your breed should be kept in a town or city?

If you have the land, knowledge and experience for such dogs - then all well and good but there really isn't many homes like that available here...

It's easy to find Anatolian Shepherd/Kangals, Boerboels, Cane Corso, Caucasian Shepherd, Central Asian shepherds, Presa Canario and all their various crosses, often bred for the wrong reasons by bybs - easily available to any idiot with the cash on free ad sites which IMO is rather scary.



Cleo38 said:


> Crossed wires .... no, not you at all





labradrk said:


> No, the original author


Ah right - my apologies


----------



## picaresque (Jun 25, 2009)

Who's Nando?! Thought that was a chicken restaurant.


----------



## Dogloverlou (Dec 8, 2013)

labradrk said:


> The difference is you have the right set up for your type of dogs. This reality is that in this country, the OVERWHELMING majority of people do have the set up and appropriate environment for dogs like that. Small island, small gardens, boxed in by neighbours on all sides, expecting dogs to walk through/cope with walking through busy towns/parks etc is the reality for more people than not.....
> 
> Restrictions don't work and in many cases can make a type of dog more desirable (case point with Pit Bulls). We don't need more restrictions but less idiots breeding these sorts of dogs and even fewer idiots buying them in the first place.


This^^ 100%

So many people get these kind of breeds and expect them to be as social as your average Labrador. They just don't understand innate breed traits. Of course they can be owned responsibly by educated and dedicated owners, but these are few and far between.


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

Zaros said:


> What an awful tragedy, and one that, IMO, could have so easily have been avoided.
> 
> I, for one, am tired of hearing these types of dogs should not be kept as pets, when, given the right conditions/environment/surroundings, they make the most excellent pets.
> Perhaps, for the safety of all, it's time Britain imposed more restrictions on the types of breeds that may be kept in certain areas under certain conditions.


I don't think there is any good reason to have them as pets. There are plenty of other breeds that would make equally excellent pets without the same level of risk factors.


----------



## Dogloverlou (Dec 8, 2013)

picaresque said:


> Who's Nando?! Thought that was a chicken restaurant.


 Nando Brown.


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

Dogloverlou said:


> This^^ 100%
> 
> So many people get these kind of breeds and expect them to be as social as your average Labrador. They just don't understand innate breed traits. Of course they can be owned responsibly by educated and dedicated owners, but these are few and far between.


That is why "oh it's always the owner, never the dog" statements irritate the hell out of me. Yes it's the owners shit management that makes situations like this occur in the first place, but it's the DOGS temperament that dictates the results. In this situation the dogs temperaments were the difference between the Beagle getting roughed up (a more normal reaction) and being mauled.......


----------



## picaresque (Jun 25, 2009)

Dogloverlou said:


> Nando Brown.


Thanks, not heard of him before but have googled now.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse (Feb 9, 2014)

picaresque said:


> Who is this Jo-Rosie?


Glad you asked :Shy


----------



## rottiepointerhouse (Feb 9, 2014)

picaresque said:


> Who's Nando?! Thought that was a chicken restaurant.


I was just going to say that too


----------



## rottiepointerhouse (Feb 9, 2014)

rocco33 said:


> I don't think there is any good reason to have them as pets. There are plenty of other breeds that would make equally excellent pets without the same level of risk factors.


Trouble is who gets to decide what breeds should and shouldn't be kept as pets and where do you draw the line? Some might argue that working line GSD's shouldn't be kept as pets but I bet if that was suggested there would be uproar, others have suggested pet homes are not suitable for the average collie but plenty of responsible and informed owners manage them perfectly as to the WL GSD owners. If we are moving away from BSL towards deed not breed then I'm not sure how banning certain breeds will work as it hasn't so far. I think the law needs to be very tough on owners of all breeds who don't control them or keep them appropriately but I can't see that happening.


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Trouble is who gets to decide what breeds should and shouldn't be kept as pets and where do you draw the line? Some might argue that working line GSD's shouldn't be kept as pets but I bet if that was suggested there would be uproar, others have suggested pet homes are not suitable for the average collie but plenty of responsible and informed owners manage them perfectly as to the WL GSD owners. If we are moving away from BSL towards deed not breed then I'm not sure how banning certain breeds will work as it hasn't so far. I think the law needs to be very tough on owners of all breeds who don't control them or keep them appropriately but I can't see that happening.


I understand and don't disagree - it's a difficult line to draw, but a bully kutta? Exactly why would anyone bring one into the country? (Assuming it is a bully kutta. of course)


----------



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

Sproglet said:


> This is the problem though. Many people that buy this type of dog do not have the right type of home or experience to own them or get them as a status symbol, hence why this happens


Absolutely! And especially so in urban Britain!


----------



## Zaros (Nov 24, 2009)

Sproglet said:


> This is the problem though. Many people that buy this type of dog do not have the right type of home or experience to own them or get them as a status symbol, hence why this happens


And that's why there needs to be some form of proper registration with responsible monitoring.



labradrk said:


> The difference is you have the right set up for your type of dogs. This reality is that in this country, the OVERWHELMING majority of people do have the set up and appropriate environment for dogs like that. Small island, small gardens, boxed in by neighbours on all sides, expecting dogs to walk through/cope with walking through busy towns/parks etc is the reality for more people than not.....
> Restrictions don't work and in many cases can make a type of dog more desirable (case point with Pit Bulls). We don't need more restrictions but less idiots breeding these sorts of dogs and even fewer idiots buying them in the first place.


I'm not sure where a cure to breeding idiots can be found but the longer these careless owners are allowed to wander free and unchecked, the more damage they're causing for the responsible dog owner. Again, it's a simple case of the many having to suffer unduly for the incompetence of the few.



ShibaPup said:


> You do not live in a heavy urban area... Do you think your breed should be kept in a town or city?
> If you have the land, knowledge and experience for such dogs - then all well and good but there really isn't many homes like that available here...
> It's easy to find Anatolian Shepherd/Kangals, Boerboels, Cane Corso, Caucasian Shepherd, Central Asian shepherds, Presa Canario and all their various crosses, often bred for the wrong reasons by bybs - easily available to any idiot with the cash on free ad sites which IMO is rather scary.


We do not recommend that our dogs or such breeds like them are kept in suburban areas. In fact we've always strongly advised against it and would not allow any pup to be taken on by anyone who lives within the confines equivalent to that of a concrete jungle. Such places are psychological torment/torture for them. Constant disturbance with very little time for them to rest and just be themselves. A stressed/agitated guardian becomes an absolute nightmare for everyone, but mostly the owner.
It's fast become a great concern of ours to realise the types of large and powerful dogs that are so easily and readily available to anyone who is willing to hand over hard cash just for an 'image'. Their negligence to fully understand the requirements, characteristics and temperaments of the breed they've chosen to take on, harnessed to the idea of image, is wholly destructive. It does the breed no justice and, ultimately, is detrimental to the more responsible image we endeavour to convey.
Of course the real hidden danger of any of these breeds is the corruption or dilution of them with other, more affable breeds. 
Tick-tock....



rocco33 said:


> I don't think there is any good reason to have them as pets.


Certainly not in Britain.


----------



## Moobli (Feb 20, 2012)

labradrk said:


> That is why "oh it's always the owner, never the dog" statements irritate the hell out of me. Yes it's the owners shit management that makes situations like this occur in the first place, but it's the DOGS temperament that dictates the results. In this situation the dogs temperaments were the difference between the Beagle getting roughed up (a more normal reaction) and being mauled.......


Amen to that!!! I have been having the very same argument on a FB group for the last hour and feel like I am banging my head against a brick wall. "It's the way they're brought up, innit"!


----------



## rottiepointerhouse (Feb 9, 2014)

rocco33 said:


> I understand and don't disagree - it's a difficult line to draw, but a bully kutta? Exactly why would anyone bring one into the country? (Assuming it is a bully kutta. of course)


I suppose playing devils advocate that enthusiasts of the breed who have perhaps had previous experience of them in other countries and know how to house/manage/care for them.


----------



## Guest (Nov 24, 2017)

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Trouble is who gets to decide what breeds should and shouldn't be kept as pets and where do you draw the line?


Ideally a responsible breeder is the one saying who should and shouldn't own their dogs. 
As I've mentioned before, a good friend of mine (and training buddy) owns and breeds Central Asian Shepherds. Hers are working dogs, and she breeds them as working dogs, and won't sell them unless they're going to a working home. Even though she keeps hers as much loved working pets, she will quickly tell you, these are not pet dogs. And they're not. That's not a criticism to say a breed is not a pet dog, it's a statement of reality and of respecting the breed for who they are.



labradrk said:


> That is why "oh it's always the owner, never the dog" statements irritate the hell out of me. Yes it's the owners shit management that makes situations like this occur in the first place, but it's the DOGS temperament that dictates the results. In this situation the dogs temperaments were the difference between the Beagle getting roughed up (a more normal reaction) and being mauled.......


Yup yup yup.
It's not the dog it's how they're raised is one of the worst adages to happen to dogs IMO.


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Trouble is who gets to decide what breeds should and shouldn't be kept as pets and where do you draw the line? Some might argue that working line GSD's shouldn't be kept as pets but I bet if that was suggested there would be uproar, others have suggested pet homes are not suitable for the average collie but plenty of responsible and informed owners manage them perfectly as to the WL GSD owners. If we are moving away from BSL towards deed not breed then I'm not sure how banning certain breeds will work as it hasn't so far. I think the law needs to be very tough on owners of all breeds who don't control them or keep them appropriately but I can't see that happening.


The difference is that GSD's/BC's ARE pets, and have been kept as such for 100+ years. Bully Kuttas and various other similar breeds are NOT pets and have never been kept as such during their development and in their country of origin. Out of the hundreds of breeds to choose from, a breed bred for dog fighting in Pakistan isn't a pet, it's a status symbol......


----------



## rottiepointerhouse (Feb 9, 2014)

ouesi said:


> Ideally a responsible breeder is the one saying who should and shouldn't own their dogs.
> As I've mentioned before, a good friend of mine (and training buddy) owns and breeds Central Asian Shepherds. Hers are working dogs, and she breeds them as working dogs, and won't sell them unless they're going to a working home. Even though she keeps hers as much loved working pets, she will quickly tell you, these are not pet dogs. And they're not. That's not a criticism to say a breed is not a pet dog, it's a statement of reality and of respecting the breed for who they are.


Yes ideally but as we all know when a breed gets popular we get irresponsible breeders out to make money from them and not caring much about where they end up. Again playing devils advocate one could argue that if any breed of dog is not suitable/safe as a pet should they be kept by amateurs at all? What happens (in general not specifically talking about your friend) if a pup is sold to a "working home" then picks up or develops a condition that means it can't work? the owner might well be attached to it and want to keep it as a pet so who decides whether they can and who enforces how they have to be kept/managed - for instance can the breeder insist the pups they sell on are neutered/insured/on a lead & muzzled in public or is it left up to the authorities to enforce safe management or just left up to the owner? Its all a bit of a grey area IMO.


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I suppose playing devils advocate that enthusiasts of the breed who have perhaps had previous experience of them in other countries and know how to house/manage/care for them.


Come on now :Hilarious how much time do you think this Mancunian spent in Pakistan getting to know Bully Kutta's as a breed? because if he was good at housing/managing them, he wouldn't have them off the lead in a public park where they just mauled someones dog to death......

I think it's time we stopped playing devils advocate and blaming everyone else for our own shit choices and poor decision making.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse (Feb 9, 2014)

labradrk said:


> The difference is that GSD's/BC's ARE pets, and have been kept as such for 100+ years. Bully Kuttas and various other similar breeds are NOT pets and have never been kept as such during their development and in their country of origin. Out of the hundreds of breeds to choose from, a breed bred for dog fighting in Pakistan isn't a pet, it's a status symbol......


Yes I do realise that GSDs and BC's are pets, I was talking specifically about working lines and throwing that out there because I knew it would get a response from those people who own WL GSD's but plenty of people would argue that dogs bred for and participating in IPO for instance shouldn't be in your average pet home. I'm not saying for one minute that Bully Kuttas should be allowed in this country or that they should be kept as pets just making the point that its a very difficult line to draw especially given how much most of us oppose BSL.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse (Feb 9, 2014)

labradrk said:


> Come on now :Hilarious how much time do you think this Mancunian spent in Pakistan getting to know Bully Kutta's as a breed? because if he was good at housing/managing them, he wouldn't have them off the lead in a public park where they just mauled someones dog to death......
> 
> I think it's time we stopped playing devils advocate and blaming everyone else for our own shit choices and poor decision making.


Hey wind your neck in. I didn't say this man was a breed enthusiast and I didn't say he had spent time in Pakistan getting to know them and I most certainly am not blaming every one else for his shit choices and decision making so please show me where I did :Grumpy The quote you have made was my response to someone asking why *anyone* would want to bring one in to the country - so a general suggestion as to why someone might want to not a justification for why this total dick head had one.


----------



## Guest (Nov 24, 2017)

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Again playing devils advocate one could argue that if any breed of dog is not suitable/safe as a pet should they be kept by amateurs at all?


I mean this respectfully, but this kind of statement just betrays ignorance of the kinds of breeds people are talking about here. We're talking breeds that have NEVER been breed as pets in any incarnation. Even WL GSDs and malinois are bred and raised successfully as pets. Bully Kutas have never been pets. CAS have never been pets. Not only that, but they truly are miserable without a herd to guard. My friend rescued a CAS who ended up in the wrong hands, and he lived in the back of her truck for 3 days while she worked up the relationship to be able to get him out. These are not your average dog or even your above average dog. They're a completely different ball of wax.

And not for nothing, it shows how asinine BSL actually is that pitbulls are a banned bred - a breed bred forever to be a pet, family dog, and Bully Kutas aren't even on the list. Ridiculous and clearly written by people who haven't a clue.


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Yes I do realise that GSDs and BC's are pets, I was talking specifically about working lines and throwing that out there because I knew it would get a response from those people who own WL GSD's but plenty of people would argue that dogs bred for and participating in IPO for instance shouldn't be in your average pet home. I'm not saying for one minute that Bully Kuttas should be allowed in this country or that they should be kept as pets just making the point that its a very difficult line to draw especially given how much most of us oppose BSL.


IPO is a sport, the same as agility, obedience etc. I presume you are referring the bitework element......most GSD's work out of prey drive rather than defensive (aggression) drive, purely because dogs that are too defensive don't tend to do well in dog sports. Dogs with shitty temperaments cannot compete in IPO. I'd take my chances over a stable dog bred for IPO over a BYB nervous dog with a crap temperament any day....


----------



## Sairy (Nov 22, 2016)

labradrk said:


> IPO is a sport, the same as agility, obedience etc. I presume you are referring the bitework element......most GSD's work out of prey drive rather than defensive (aggression) drive, purely because dogs that are too defensive don't tend to do well in dog sports. Dogs with shitty temperaments cannot compete in IPO. I'd take my chances over a stable dog bred for IPO over a BYB nervous dog with a crap temperament any day....


Absolutely this! And when doing IPO these dogs are going to be in "work mode" which is completely different to when they are chilling out in the living room. The bitework is really just play for dogs trained in IPO and when trained correctly the dog will release immediately upon command - a far cry from a dog in true fight mode like these two dogs.

My heart goes out to the owners of the beagle. I just hope it was a quick death for him.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse (Feb 9, 2014)

ouesi said:


> I mean this respectfully, but this kind of statement just betrays ignorance of the kinds of breeds people are talking about here. We're talking breeds that have NEVER been breed as pets in any incarnation. Even WL GSDs and malinois are bred and raised successfully as pets. Bully Kutas have never been pets. CAS have never been pets. Not only that, but they truly are miserable without a herd to guard. My friend rescued a CAS who ended up in the wrong hands, and he lived in the back of her truck for 3 days while she worked up the relationship to be able to get him out. These are not your average dog or even your above average dog. They're a completely different ball of wax.
> 
> And not for nothing, it shows how asinine BSL actually is that pitbulls are a banned bred - a breed bred forever to be a pet, family dog, and Bully Kutas aren't even on the list. Ridiculous and clearly written by people who haven't a clue.


So are you saying that the Bully Kutta has never lived as a family pet anywhere? not even in Pakistan? Qucik google brings this up but I have no idea how accurate it is

"The Pakistani Bully Kutta is a very intelligent and noble breed, It's a very good personality dog. Pakistani Bully Kutta can make an amenable companion for responsible and knowledgeable owners. Well raised Bully Kutta are good with kids, dogs, other animals, are very loving and playful. Bongay Bully is powerful, high energy dog and extremely dominating territorial breed"

Interesting old thread here on this subject - particularly posts 13, 15 & 26.

https://www.petforums.co.uk/threads/the-bully-kutta.348347/page-2

Couldn't agree more about BSL, I just find it worrying that people slam BSL all the time but suddenly want this breed included/banned from the country because this one idiot owner let this awful attack happen.



labradrk said:


> IPO is a sport, the same as agility, obedience etc. I presume you are referring the bitework element......most GSD's work out of prey drive rather than defensive (aggression) drive, purely because dogs that are too defensive don't tend to do well in dog sports. Dogs with shitty temperaments cannot compete in IPO. I'd take my chances over a stable dog bred for IPO over a BYB nervous dog with a crap temperament any day....


Again thank you but I do know what IPO is, you keep telling me the obvious tonight. I am not saying WL GSDs and those who do IPO shouldn't be kept as pets I'm saying that when some posters have questioned why anyone would want to own this breed (Bully Kutta) and that they should not be kept as pets in this country that lots of people will also question why dogs trained in bite work are kept as pets. You and others involved with them and the sport might understand about bite work but with respect Joe Public don't and won't know the point made by @Sairy about the dog releasing on command. I know you GSD WL/IPO enthusiasts are all going to say your breed is different but I don't think the general public will think that or appreciate that any idiot can get their hands on a WL GSD and train it in bite work.


----------



## tabulahrasa (Nov 4, 2012)

labradrk said:


> That is why "oh it's always the owner, never the dog" statements irritate the hell out of me. Yes it's the owners shit management that makes situations like this occur in the first place, but it's the DOGS temperament that dictates the results. In this situation the dogs temperaments were the difference between the Beagle getting roughed up (a more normal reaction) and being mauled.......





Moobli said:


> Amen to that!!! I have been having the very same argument on a FB group for the last hour and feel like I am banging my head against a brick wall. "It's the way they're brought up, innit"!


They're two different things though, me and Brock were once introduced to someone by one of his specialists as proof that you can do everything right and still end up with a dog with a major behavioural issue...

But, I know he's hugely reactive to dogs, can be aggressive with strange humans - so while yes his responses to situations are totally inappropriate and that is to do with him and not me, if he attacked a dog/person that's on me for allowing that situation to happen.


----------



## Guest (Nov 24, 2017)

rottiepointerhouse said:


> So are you saying that the Bully Kutta has never lived as a family pet anywhere? not even in Pakistan?


No. I'm saying they're not *bred* as pets. And I'll just repeat what I said earlier:


ouesi said:


> Even though she keeps hers as much loved working pets, she will quickly tell you, these are not pet dogs.


My friend's CAS are pets. My children play with them, they attend seminars, accompany their owner to dog training classes, go to the local feed and seed, etc. They're well loved family dogs. Saying that, the breed is not a pet breed.

I don't say that as a criticism, it just is what it is. They're not pets. They're a specialist breed to the point that even your above average well-versed dog person wouldn't know how to deal with them. They don't respond like pet dogs. This is not a dog you take to the kennels when you go out of town, or hire a dog walker for, or take to the groomers to have their nails done or even let the vet tech take in the back for x-rays. They're not going to do 'normal' dog stuff, they operate differently.

To make matters even more complicated, with a lot of these primitive breeds, temperaments vary wildly. So while your neighbor may have the world's friendliest Bully Kuta with a stable temperament, a littermate of that dog may be the one killing a dog in the park just because they happened to be sharing the same space. You have little way of knowing which one you're going to end up with.


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

ouesi said:


> Ideally a responsible breeder is the one saying who should and shouldn't own their dogs.
> As I've mentioned before, a good friend of mine (and training buddy) owns and breeds Central Asian Shepherds. Hers are working dogs, and she breeds them as working dogs, and won't sell them unless they're going to a working home. Even though she keeps hers as much loved working pets, she will quickly tell you, these are not pet dogs. And they're not. That's not a criticism to say a breed is not a pet dog, it's a statement of reality and of respecting the breed for who they are.
> .


I completely agree with this, the problem is, that only works with 'specialist' 'unpopular' breeds. Once it gets out of the hands of the breed enthusiasts, which happens when they start to become popular or the latest status dog, it then becomes a ticking time bomb.


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

rottiepointerhouse said:


> So are you saying that the Bully Kutta has never lived as a family pet anywhere? not even in Pakistan? Qucik google brings this up but I have no idea how accurate it is
> 
> "The Pakistani Bully Kutta is a very intelligent and noble breed, It's a very good personality dog. Pakistani Bully Kutta can make an amenable companion for responsible and knowledgeable owners. Well raised Bully Kutta are good with kids, dogs, other animals, are very loving and playful. Bongay Bully is powerful, high energy dog and extremely dominating territorial breed"
> 
> ...


This sort of "debate" happens EVERY time an incident like this happens. Oh this breed could be pets in the right hands, it's always the owner and not the dogs, oh the other party must take some of the blame as per that rather shocking post by a dog trainer. No! these dogs are NOT pets, and yet already they find themselves living as such in suburbia. This is the outcome. This is what happens when you take a giant breed sized dog bred for dog fighting in Pakistan and expect it to behave like a pet running around after a ball launcher in the park. This is what happens when 'regular' pet owners that probably couldn't manage a Labrador never mind one of these, get hold of a breed that should be reserved for extremely specialist homes. Homes that won't exist in 99% of the population.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse (Feb 9, 2014)

labradrk said:


> This sort of "debate" happens EVERY time an incident like this happens. Oh this breed could be pets in the right hands, it's always the owner and not the dogs, oh the other party must take some of the blame as per that rather shocking post by a dog trainer. No! these dogs are NOT pets, and yet already they find themselves living as such in suburbia. This is the outcome. This is what happens when you take a giant breed sized dog bred for dog fighting in Pakistan and expect it to behave like a pet running around after a ball launcher in the park. This is what happens when 'regular' pet owners that probably couldn't manage a Labrador never mind one of these, get hold of a breed that should be reserved for extremely specialist homes. Homes that won't exist in 99% of the population.


Yes it does happen every time there is an incident, it happens with staffs, with rotties and in years gone by very much so with GSD's. Whenever someone comes on here ranting about their dog being attacked by a rottie or by a staff they get told often quite forcefully that we should condemn the deed not the breed (which isn't the same as saying its always the owner and not the dog at all) but in this case you and others want to condemn the breed. Its that hypocrisy I'm objecting to. You are either in favour of BSL or you are not, you can't just be in favour of it for some breeds. I'm also wondering why the Bully Kutta is the one people are focusing on when there were two dogs involved. So I'm not saying whether they should or should not be kept as pets, I was just raising the issue of who would decide which breeds should be allowed and which shouldn't and on what criteria and once we start going down that road we should expect that members of the public will start wanting the same controls on other breeds too especially after any incident which makes the front pages. If the authorities came down much much harder on owners of dogs behaving badly then we wouldn't need to have this conversation as owners would be much more reluctant to take on or keep dogs they cannot manage.


----------



## Guest (Nov 25, 2017)

labradrk said:


> The difference is that GSD's/BC's ARE pets, and have been kept as such for 100+ years. Bully Kuttas and various other similar breeds are NOT pets and have never been kept as such during their development and in their country of origin. Out of the hundreds of breeds to choose from, a breed bred for dog fighting in Pakistan isn't a pet, it's a status symbol......


I know there are unfortunately lots of breeders, who breed dogs only for fighting, especially pitbulls and some LGDs. What is left of their true nature is not much, especially after the circumstances they grow up in. Similarly, lots of LGDs are bred only to become pets and have lost their ability to work. What we should do is to do the homework and know what type of LGD the dog is. There are lots of variations btw too, some are pretty social whereas others are not. Individual differences are huge in the same litter.



ouesi said:


> No. I'm saying they're not *bred* as pets. And I'll just repeat what I said earlier: My friend's CAS are pets. My children play with them, they attend seminars, accompany their owner to dog training classes, go to the local feed and seed, etc. They're well loved family dogs. Saying that, the breed is not a pet breed.
> I don't say that as a criticism, it just is what it is. They're not pets. They're a specialist breed to the point that even your above average well-versed dog person wouldn't know how to deal with them. They don't respond like pet dogs. This is not a dog you take to the kennels when you go out of town, or hire a dog walker for, or take to the groomers to have their nails done or even let the vet tech take in the back for x-rays. They're not going to do 'normal' dog stuff, they operate differently.
> 
> To make matters even more complicated, with a lot of these primitive breeds, temperaments vary wildly. So while your neighbor may have the world's friendliest Bully Kuta with a stable temperament, a littermate of that dog may be the one killing a dog in the park just because they happened to be sharing the same space. You have little way of knowing which one you're going to end up with.


I agree with you that these are not meant to be just pets we discourage pet ownerships. Many end up being one though, and can be pretty happy, balanced dogs, if the circumstances are right and the owners know what to do. But there was one point I strongly disagree with you, based on personal experience, on experience about 20 other LGD owners I personally know , who use their sarplaninac/other LGD as a working dog, and also about numerous studies I have read. All the dogs, including ours, have been taken to vets, without any problem. They had their x-rays done without a problem. The studies I read, all point out that in order to succesfully use LGDs as guardians all require regular check ups by a vet. But naturally if vets don´t know what they are doing, nor do the owners and the first experiences are bad and there is little trust between the dog and the owner, or the vet, things can go wrong. Maybe that will be worth further checking why experiences you know about have been so bad, if that has not been a problem at all for so many others?

I also often wonder when we talk about the "experts" who know the breed, how deep their knowledge really is. IMO if we want to really know how to succesfully breed and use LGDs, we should really ask people from the original countries, who use them as workig dogs. E.g how they raise saplaninacs in Serbia and Macedonia. I know e.g. that sars live there in the villages, when their flock is indoors and move to the mountains with the flock, when need be. So the dogs can live among people, if people know what they are doing. But the society is different there and all know how the dog behaves. That is why there isn´t any problems with them. I understand that this will never happen in US nor in UK, nor in many other European country, though. There is very little understanding of what a dog should or shouldn´t do among the majority of people IMO. But that makes people the problem, not the dog.

And in this case I bet that if the owner of this Bully Kutta will prove to a bad dog owner, who knew nothing or just didn´t care of his dog. To compare, I had also an encounter with another dog with Zara, who is a very sharp LGD. We were walking, she was an a leash and suddenly two GSDs attacked her, one bitch and another a dog. I was wondering shall I let Zara off leash so she could properly defend herself, but then the owner came running and took the bitch out. The dog tried to continue the attack, but Zara put him down in a second. She held him tight with her paws and the dog surrendered belly up, so Zara let him go. Guess how many marks were there on him? Zero. Zara got bitten badly though and I had to take her to the vet to get a few stitches and clean the wound.

But then, in all breeds there are dogs, who will continue to fight longer, even after a dog surrenders and even kills other dogs. But that goes for all breeds. And if a dog is bred for fighting, well, that is what he learned to do. But even then a dog doesn´t become a killing machine, remember the case where dozens of pitbulls were saved and learned to be normal pets. That is a good lesson for everyone to learn.


----------



## Guest (Nov 25, 2017)

MrsZee said:


> But there was one point I strongly disagree with you, based on personal experience, on experience about 20 other LGD owners I personally know , who use their sarplaninac/other LGD as a working dog, and also about numerous studies I have read. All the dogs, including ours, have been taken to vets, without any problem. They had their x-rays done without a problem. The studies I read, all point out that in order to succesfully use LGDs as guardians all require regular check ups by a vet.


I never said they shouldn't be taken to the vet?!
I said it was not a dog you hand over to the vet tech and let them handle the dog. The ones I know go to the vet without a problem, but the owners are heavily involved. These dogs are very reliant on the owner saying "it's okay" and tend to not trust anyone who is not part of the small circle, which vet techs usually aren't.



MrsZee said:


> I also often wonder when we talk about the "experts" who know the breed, how deep their knowledge really is. IMO if we want to really know how to succesfully breed and use LGDs, we should really ask people from the original countries, who use them as workig dogs.


I wonder this too, and agree that those who raise and use the dogs as actual working dogs are the true experts.


----------



## Guest (Nov 25, 2017)

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Yes it does happen every time there is an incident, it happens with staffs, with rotties and in years gone by very much so with GSD's. Whenever someone comes on here ranting about their dog being attacked by a rottie or by a staff they get told often quite forcefully that we should condemn the deed not the breed (which isn't the same as saying its always the owner and not the dog at all) but in this case you and others want to condemn the breed. Its that hypocrisy I'm objecting to. You are either in favour of BSL or you are not, you can't just be in favour of it for some breeds. I'm also wondering why the Bully Kutta is the one people are focusing on when there were two dogs involved. So I'm not saying whether they should or should not be kept as pets, I was just raising the issue of who would decide which breeds should be allowed and which shouldn't and on what criteria and once we start going down that road we should expect that members of the public will start wanting the same controls on other breeds too especially after any incident which makes the front pages. If the authorities came down much much harder on owners of dogs behaving badly then we wouldn't need to have this conversation as owners would be much more reluctant to take on or keep dogs they cannot manage.


Saying a breed of dog shouldn't be kept as a pet is not supporting BSL.
It's like saying that an ex-racing greyhound probably isn't the best idea is you have pet house rabbits. It's not a condemnation of the breed but rather a realistic statement based on knowledge of the breed. Are there ex-racing greyhounds who get along fine with pet house rabbits? I'm sure there are somewhere. But no one in their right mind would say "oh yeah, great idea, get you an ex racer to live in your house with your pet rabbits." No, you're going to say "hold on a minute, let's be realistic here."


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

ouesi said:


> Saying a breed of dog shouldn't be kept as a pet is not supporting BSL.


I agree so long as it's not being used as an excuse to push BSL. Normally as soon as you push the idea of "not a pet" the idea of BSL follows.

For those who do feel BSL is justified.. simple question. can you create a definition of a "breed" suitable for a legal system?

Education and owners being held responsible for a dogs actions as been far more efficient in reducing incidents than any breed specific legislation.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse (Feb 9, 2014)

ouesi said:


> Saying a breed of dog shouldn't be kept as a pet is not supporting BSL.
> It's like saying that an ex-racing greyhound probably isn't the best idea is you have pet house rabbits. It's not a condemnation of the breed but rather a realistic statement based on knowledge of the breed. Are there ex-racing greyhounds who get along fine with pet house rabbits? I'm sure there are somewhere. But no one in their right mind would say "oh yeah, great idea, get you an ex racer to live in your house with your pet rabbits." No, you're going to say "hold on a minute, let's be realistic here."


Not sure I agree with that analogy. If you have pet rabbits and want to keep an ex-racing greyhound then make your rabbit housing/run greyhound proof. If you have a dog that is not good with other dogs then manage it properly.


----------



## Guest (Nov 25, 2017)

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Not sure I agree with that analogy. If you have pet rabbits and want to keep an ex-racing greyhound then make your rabbit housing/run greyhound proof. If you have a dog that is not good with other dogs then manage it properly.


See, that's where I don't agree. 
If you have rabbits, don't court trouble and get a dog likely to kill them.

And there is "not good with other dogs" and "wants to and will kill other dogs on sight." 
There are plenty of dogs (and yes, breeds of dogs) who are generally not good with other dogs. That's not remotely the same thing as a dog like the two described who opted to kill the beagle have no place in society IMHO. And I'm not saying that as a breed thing, I'm saying that in reference to those two individual dogs. The deed is unforgivable.

A dog who will choose to kill another dog (outside of a rare case of predatory drift) is not redeemable. This is not a dog who with the right owner, right management will be okay. Never mind that the type of management a dog like that would require would make for a miserable life for any dog, but management can fail, and the consequences of failed management here are too high of a risk.

I remember a few years back there was a video of a dog who stalked and attacked a child. The video went viral because the family cat attacked the dog and saved the child, but the dog's behavior made the hair on the back of my neck stand up. The dog sought out the child to attack. It was clear predatory behavior towards a child. 
There too were a ton of apologists saying the dogs just needed the right training, management, more love... No. That dog was not redeemable either, and kudos to the rescue who refused to allow him to be taken on by the multiple trainers asking to rehab the dog and had him PTS instead - the only responsible choice IMO.

We can't save them all, and it does a disservice to the saveable dogs out there when we try to make all dogs redeemable.


----------



## ShibaPup (Mar 22, 2017)

Why would anyone want to import such a breed? Guessing it's imported because the dog has cropped ears - why would you even want a dog with cropped ears?

The attack happened on a field near St Patrick’s High School, Manchester. Apparently the owner of the two dogs is from Eccles. Go on google maps and have a look at that area - it's a heavily built up, urban area...

What type of breeder would allow a puppy of such a breed to go to a home like that? 

Why would anyone want a giant dog bred primarily for guarding and fighting, not kept as pets in a city environment? I'm going to assume they're probably kept in kennels or outside rather than a family home by breeders or in their native country. Apparently males reach 81 – 89 cm adult heigh!! 70–90 kg adult weight - weigh more than I do!! You have a huge dog - highly likely to be dog intolerant. In a built up urban area... with lots of other dogs around. It isn't the right environment for such a breed - never mind adding an inexperienced owner to the mix.

There's someone who went out got a Caucasian shepherd after losing their Bullmastiff. Lives in an town. The research he did before into getting such a breed... Looking at pictures of large breeds, fell in love with the huge size and that they are phenomenal guards and got a puppy 10 days after losing his old dog. But because he had a Bullmastiff he is used to head strong, powerful breeds... that's what I find scary - such breeds so easy to find and obtain.


----------



## Dogloverlou (Dec 8, 2013)

I did a bit of Google research last night and found there is very little accurate info on the Bully Kutta. However, in their home country particularly they are still widely used for dog fighting. I saw one very upsetting video of very young puppies being encouraged to fight in which they was full on dragging and shaking each other about 

Was shocked to see there are breeders in the UK too! But again next to no info on the breed's temperament. I guess there is an argument for those breeding them here eventually watering down their temperament as what usually happens which is a whole other topic. But certainly an imported puppy is going to come from very sharp lines with a predisposition to DA if it's parents and grandparents etc have been used for fighting.


----------



## picaresque (Jun 25, 2009)

Check out the comments beneath this video about this poor pup's ears (beware, you will end up down a youtube rabbit hole)








> Only if ear cropping was legal in the UK it would be perfect the floppy ears don't look right on the bk





> Totally agree with your comment the big floppy ears ruin the dogs mean looks


The bully kutta community in the UK must be quite small. The dog involved in this incident probably came from one of these guys.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse (Feb 9, 2014)

ouesi said:


> See, that's where I don't agree.
> If you have rabbits, don't court trouble and get a dog likely to kill them.
> 
> And there is "not good with other dogs" and "wants to and will kill other dogs on sight."
> ...


Just to be absolutely clear I am not saying there is a place in society for these two dogs who have killed another dog, I do believe in this situation they should be PTS but I also believe the emphasis on prevention of these types of attacks should be aimed at owners and one way to do that is to make the punishment severe enough that it puts other people off of owning breeds they know nothing about and do not have the skills to manage. If we go down the route of banning certain breeds then watch out because before long they will be coming for your breed too (your in general). I do remember the video you mentioned and I agreed with you on that thread that the dog should be PTS. This isn't about trying to save every dog from being destroyed, its about punishing the deed not the breed.

Also one of the dogs that killed the beagle was "apparently" a staffie cross ridgeback and it would also appear there are a good number of Bully Kutta dogs in this country who apparently don't want to kill other dogs on sight. So I'm afraid I don't like the suggestions that certain breeds of dogs should not be kept as pets because of something they "might" do. If you have a breed that "might" then manage it appropriately or don't get it and if it causes injury to another dog or person then expect to be punished.


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Yes it does happen every time there is an incident, it happens with staffs, with rotties and in years gone by very much so with GSD's. Whenever someone comes on here ranting about their dog being attacked by a rottie or by a staff they get told often quite forcefully that we should condemn the deed not the breed (which isn't the same as saying its always the owner and not the dog at all) but in this case you and others want to condemn the breed. Its that hypocrisy I'm objecting to. You are either in favour of BSL or you are not, you can't just be in favour of it for some breeds. I'm also wondering why the Bully Kutta is the one people are focusing on when there were two dogs involved. So I'm not saying whether they should or should not be kept as pets, I was just raising the issue of who would decide which breeds should be allowed and which shouldn't and on what criteria and once we start going down that road we should expect that members of the public will start wanting the same controls on other breeds too especially after any incident which makes the front pages. If the authorities came down much much harder on owners of dogs behaving badly then we wouldn't need to have this conversation as owners would be much more reluctant to take on or keep dogs they cannot manage.


I don't support BSL at all, I have no idea why this came into the conversation. BSL is farcical for this exact reason; how can some breeds be banned for being "dangerous" while others like the Bully Kutta are legal? it should be abolished all together, it doesn't work. I think the law regarding the owning/breeding/management of dogs needs a complete overhaul, but no one seems to have the answers to what they should be and how to implement it. History has shown that you can put 'rules' in place but unless someone is there is enforce them then they don't work. The police don't have the time, resources and manpower to police human anti social behaviour and crime never mind all the canine offenders (or rather, their owners).

I still maintain that this breed really had no place being brought into this country in the first place. As as soon as they slip out of the hands of the tiny minority that can perhaps manage them appropriately, you open up the floodgates for trouble.....case point.


----------



## 3dogs2cats (Aug 15, 2012)

picaresque said:


> The bully kutta community in the UK must be quite small. The dog involved in this incident probably came from one of these guys.


The dog involved had cropped ears, the ones I `ve seen (online) from UK have floppy ears. He must have imported Loki from abroad or rehomed from someone who had . Either that or a UK breeder is cropping ears?


----------



## picaresque (Jun 25, 2009)

3dogs2cats said:


> The dog involved had cropped ears, the ones I `ve seen (online) from UK have floppy ears. He must have imported Loki from abroad or rehomed from someone who had . Either that or a UK breeder is cropping ears?


I imagine some of these dogs are imported and then sold on.


----------



## Zaros (Nov 24, 2009)

3dogs2cats said:


> The dog involved had cropped ears, the ones I `ve seen (online) from UK have floppy ears. He must have imported Loki from abroad or rehomed from someone who had . Either that or a UK breeder is cropping ears?


It doesn't necessarily have to be a breeder cropping ears or an import with its ears already cropped. Folks who come into possession of this type of breed often know someone who knows someone who can crop a dog's ears in their garage for a few quid. Usually these 'someones' are, or have been, connected to some illegal dog ring.
They then keep the dog indoors for the duration of the healing process.
You can always tell a homemade crop job because the ears finish up looking like the shriveled and curled up edges of over fried bacon. A result of stitching the wounds too tight with the wrong type of thread or incorrect stapling.
The same people will also sharpen your dog's teeth if you think it would add to the dogs mean looks


----------



## Zaros (Nov 24, 2009)

rottiepointerhouse said:


> as we all know when a breed gets popular we get irresponsible breeders out to make money from them and not caring much about where they end up.


The crux of everyone's problems.


----------



## Guest (Nov 25, 2017)

rottiepointerhouse said:


> So I'm afraid I don't like the suggestions that certain breeds of dogs should not be kept as pets because of something they "might" do.


I'm not saying certain breeds shouldn't be kept as pets because of what they might do.
I'm saying certain breeds shouldn't be kept as pets because it's not fair to the dog and the nature of the breed.

I don't know anything about Bully Kutas (and I'm not going to rely on google to inform myself), but I do know about breeds like the more primitive LGDs and saying they should not be pets is a statement of respect for the breed and how they will be happy, fulfilled dogs. A great Pyr without a herd is no big deal. They have been bred for centuries now as pets as well as guardians. A CAS without a herd is not going to be a happy dog, certainly not fulfilled, and it's not a nice thing to do to a breed who is happiest when given a clear job to do. 
It's no different than saying a high drive dog like a WL GSD is going to need a 'job' or you'll end up with a neurotic mess of a dog. The difference though is that giving a WL GSD a 'job' as a pet is a hell of a lot easier than giving a LGD a 'job' as a pet.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse (Feb 9, 2014)

ouesi said:


> I'm not saying certain breeds shouldn't be kept as pets because of what they might do.
> I'm saying certain breeds shouldn't be kept as pets because it's not fair to the dog and the nature of the breed.
> 
> I don't know anything about Bully Kutas (and I'm not going to rely on google to inform myself), but I do know about breeds like the more primitive LGDs and saying they should not be pets is a statement of respect for the breed and how they will be happy, fulfilled dogs. A great Pyr without a herd is no big deal. They have been bred for centuries now as pets as well as guardians. A CAS without a herd is not going to be a happy dog, certainly not fulfilled, and it's not a nice thing to do to a breed who is happiest when given a clear job to do.
> It's no different than saying a high drive dog like a WL GSD is going to need a 'job' or you'll end up with a neurotic mess of a dog. The difference though is that giving a WL GSD a 'job' as a pet is a hell of a lot easier than giving a LGD a 'job' as a pet.


I don't disagree with that but there are still going to be people who feel they can give them a job to do, who have researched the breed and/or know of others and have support from a breeder. I just don't get the number of people saying they and others like LGD's have no place as pets in this country because there are some homes with the space and the knowledge to care for them and give them a job to do. As we know only too well on here from a past member a WL GSD can also easily fall into the wrong hands in the totally wrong situation and I would say there but for the grace of god or extremely good luck that one didn't end in disaster which it was heading for.


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

Sorry but I still don't see the relevance of comparison between this case and other breeds (GSDs being singled out for some reason....) and people's ability to handle them. That is completely relative to the person because we all know that what one person finds challenging another will find a walk in the park.

The difference in the examples that you are quoting is in an experienced pet home with owners that have done their research regarding suitability (both character wise and environment wise), a well balanced GSD will likely do just fine. The old member who you are referring to did neither of those things and that dog suffered for their arrogance.

Whereas with a Bully Kutta I think the number of people who have not only the experience to physically handle and understand such a dog but the appropriate set up to accommodate them will be minimal. They aren't pets. .


----------



## rottiepointerhouse (Feb 9, 2014)

labradrk said:


> Sorry but I still don't see the relevance of comparison between this case and other breeds (GSDs being singled out for some reason....) and people's ability to handle them. That is completely relative to the person because we all know that what one person finds challenging another will find a walk in the park.
> 
> The difference in the examples that you are quoting is in an experienced pet home with owners that have done their research regarding suitability (both character wise and environment wise), a well balanced GSD will likely do just fine. The old member who you are referring to did neither of those things and that dog suffered for their arrogance.
> 
> Whereas with a Bully Kutta I think the number of people who have not only the experience to physically handle and understand such a dog but the appropriate set up to accommodate them will be minimal. They aren't pets. .


So you keep saying but I dare say if I went on the Bully Kutta facebook page or similar there would be plenty of people who would disagree with you just as those people who think LSG's shouldn't be pet will have people disagreeing with them. Its one thing to say they are not suited to xyz environment but quite another to say they should not be pets at all especially when no one here seems to have any experience of them. Of course there is a relevance to other breeds, its not that long ago one of the journalists did a whole radio programme about who on earth and why would anyone keep a rottie as a pet and I'm absolutely certain if we go down that road it won't be long before other breeds get added to the list and those of us who keep breeds the general public can be wary of (GSD's included) will be forced to muzzle, leash, neuter etc etc. So I come back to punish the deed not the breed.


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

rottiepointerhouse said:


> I don't disagree with that but there are still going to be people who feel they can give them a job to do, who have researched the breed and/or know of others and have support from a breeder. I just don't get the number of people saying they and others like LGD's have no place as pets in this country because there are some homes with the space and the knowledge to care for them and give them a job to do. As we know only too well on here from a past member a WL GSD can also easily fall into the wrong hands in the totally wrong situation and I would say there but for the grace of god or extremely good luck that one didn't end in disaster which it was heading for.


Because they don't have to own one of these dogs, there are others they can own and that will do the job of a pet.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse (Feb 9, 2014)

rocco33 said:


> Because they don't have to own one of these dogs, there are others they can own and that will do the job of a pet.


Define one of "these dogs". You could say that about many breeds - you don't need to own that as there are plenty of other breeds to choose from. All very well until its "your" breed people want to ban.


----------



## Guest (Nov 25, 2017)

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Define one of "these dogs". You could say that about many breeds - you don't need to own that as there are plenty of other breeds to choose from. All very well until its "your" breed people want to ban.


Just to clarify (again) opining that a breed is not a 'pet' breed =/= saying the breed should be banned. It's clarifying what the breed is and isn't suited for. Any responsible breeder who says no to a potential buyer based on if they're looking for a pet isn't supporting breed bans, they're respecting their breed's needs.


----------



## Guest (Nov 25, 2017)

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Its one thing to say they are not suited to xyz environment but quite another to say they should not be pets at all especially when no one here seems to have any experience of them. Of course there is a relevance to other breeds, its not that long ago one of the journalists did a whole radio programme about who on earth and why would anyone keep a rottie as a pet and I'm absolutely certain if we go down that road it won't be long before other breeds get added to the list and those of us who keep breeds the general public can be wary of (GSD's included) will be forced to muzzle, leash, neuter etc etc. So I come back to punish the deed not the breed.


I totally agree with you. Again speaking from experience as an owner of one of the sharpest and most primitive LGD breeds, a LGD can be happy without a flock. But what the dog really needs is something to guard, an area of it´s own. I know two extremely well behaving sarplaninacs, who guard a shop together. They have passed their characters tests, do agility and go to exhibitions, and yet, are fierceless guards. They go for citywalks, nature walks ad dog parks and they are also sometimes off leash. No hassle, no problems. But they do have the right circumstances and the right owner, who knows what to do and what to expect from her dogs.

Also the idea that once you have a flock for the dog to guard, all will be well, is just not true. Lots of dogs don´t make it as a proper working dog and lots of "experienced" breeders/working dog owners simply have no idea of what they are doing. They use e-collars, attach "wooden/metallic" sticks around the dogs collar or they fence them out from people. Why? None of that is necessary and all that is actually harmful for the dog. Still they keep promoting those harmful practises,and people believe them, as they have "experience".

My question is this: Had that sad incident happened to a German Shephard e.g. I bet no one would have condemned the breed, but understood that the individual dog was a problem dog, which was either ill or raised by an idiotic owner. What do you think? Like if a pitbull kills something, it becomes instantly a monster breed, but of a golden retriever does it, it is still just one individual causing a problem and the breed is fine. And if this mentality still exists in a pet forum, how bad it is amongst others?


----------



## MiffyMoo (Sep 15, 2015)

ouesi said:


> See, that's where I don't agree.
> If you have rabbits, don't court trouble and get a dog likely to kill them.
> 
> And there is "not good with other dogs" and "wants to and will kill other dogs on sight."
> ...


I remember that video well, and it terrified me. I have never seen a dog behave like that around humans, and I think if any of mine did, I would think very strongly about having it PTS. It's too much of a risk - you simply cannot ever assume you will never let your dog be in a situation where it can harm a child. What if the lead broke, or it escaped from your property?

This in turn makes me think of all the Billy Big Balls who proudly advertise husky x wolf. Not sure how true any of those adverts are, but it's the craziest idea ever!


----------



## rottiepointerhouse (Feb 9, 2014)

ouesi said:


> Just to clarify (again) opining that a breed is not a 'pet' breed =/= saying the breed should be banned. It's clarifying what the breed is and isn't suited for. Any responsible breeder who says no to a potential buyer based on if they're looking for a pet isn't supporting breed bans, they're respecting their breed's needs.


Yes I understand that, my point is there are thousands of dogs in homes that are not necessarily suitable for their needs and plenty of working breeds not working and plenty of breeds the general public don't feel should be owned as pets. It should be up to responsible breeders to decide whether or not a potential home can meet the needs of their breed/pups not people on a forum who have never even met one. As I also said in answer to one of your posts yesterday what happens when the breeder sells a pup to a working home and for some reason such as health issues or temperament issues the dog doesn't make the grade or can't continue working? Why is all the focus of this discussion on the Bully and not on the other dog? Totally agree with @MrsZee - would we even be having this discussion if it had been two GSD's or two rotties or two staffies or two dogs of "type"? I doubt it, we would all be expressing sympathy and discussing what can be done to make owners act more responsibly and manage their dogs properly.


----------



## Guest (Nov 25, 2017)

I think it does far more harm to a breed to say “you can make it work” than It does to just talk straight and accept that some breeds are specialist breeds and not meant to be in a pet home living a pet life.

As for LGD who don’t cut it as guardians, responsible breeders take them back, assess why they didn’t work out (could be temperament or could be a set-up and stock management issue), then they place the dog responsibly based on the reason he/she didn’t work out.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

ouesi said:


> I think it does far more harm to a breed to say "you can make it work" than It does to just talk straight and accept that some breeds are specialist breeds and not meant to be in a pet home living a pet life.


I would actually say the vast majority of breeds are specialist breeds.. whilst each are individuals they do share traits to a degree. This is partly where education is failing. It's been stated again and again but I'll repeat it again.. People spend more time researching a new car than they do a new dog, a living breathing animal. Also interesting to note that no dog breed started off as a "housepet".


----------



## elmthesofties (Aug 8, 2011)

I'm not convinced that many of the dogs that are supposed to be these sorts of breeds are pedigrees. There are plenty of bull/mastiff type dogs that could produce similar looking pups, and without any sort of formal logs, I don't think there's any way of proving whether these dogs are actually what they are claimed to be.

I've met a few Presa Canarios and Cane Corsos, and I have to say that none of them look too similar to pictures you get on google images. Some looked a lot like Boxer, Ridgeback, English Mastiff, Great Dane, or Rottie crosses. All of the ones I've met have had absolutely delightful temperaments, too, even if owned by people who are very inexperienced with dogs. I wouldn't be surprised if the supposed BK was a mix of more 'domesticated' breeds, and this is more a case of the owner not putting in the effort with a dog who could have potentially been a good pet. That's not to negate the points made in the discussion, more a case of me thinking aloud.


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

Goblin said:


> I would actually say the vast majority of breeds are specialist breeds.. whilst each are individuals they do share traits to a degree. This is partly where education is failing. It's been stated again and again but I'll repeat it again.. People spend more time researching a new car than they do a new dog, a living breathing animal. Also interesting to note that no dog breed started off as a "housepet".


Define specialist? I'm looking at the list of top 20 breeds in this country and I wouldn't say any were particularly specialised. Some have in my opinion greater needs than others, but specialist as in the majority of people (with research) couldn't handle one......nope.

I agree that many people put no research into getting a dog. I think a lot of it stems back to this very bizarre notion that dogs are this blank slate and everything is down to how they are raised (the "it's never the dog, always the owner" mantra).


----------



## picaresque (Jun 25, 2009)

I get that the 'it's all in how you raise them' thing comes from a good place but as has been repeatedly said it ends up doing more harm than good. It's not very realistic to suggest someone gets a working collie as a lapdog, because if you raise it as one blah blah blah...


----------



## MiffyMoo (Sep 15, 2015)

picaresque said:


> I get that the 'it's all in how you raise them' thing comes from a good place but as has been repeatedly said it ends up doing more harm than good. It's not very realistic to suggest someone gets a working collie as a lapdog, because if you raise it as one blah blah blah...


The amount of people who flat out refuse to believe that some dogs are born with bad temperaments is beyond belief. They're not angels, they are living beings with individual personalities. Yes, they are generally a LOT nicer than humans, but they're not infallible


----------



## ShibaPup (Mar 22, 2017)

I've spent a while reading through Bully Kutta UK groups.

Even in those groups people who own them are saying they have to be kept separate from their other dogs they've grown up with - especially once mature.

"The other thing to remember is that they are not domestic dogs and never have been. This breed has only ever been bred for work and function. Generally bred for guarding or aggressive temps for many years."

"My boy's dad was human and dog aggressive"​
So many crosses sold very cheaply - rehomed a few months later when people realise what they've actually got on there hands. Idiots trying to breed the biggest, most aggressive dogs that ends up with the dogs with very iffy temperaments to say the least! Being passed around multiple times in a very short space of time.

People in the UK passionate about Bully Kuttas try to rally round and help, even exposing byb but there aren't enough experienced homes for the cross and pure Bully's already in the UK... According to them there are very, very few nice examples of Bully Kuttas outside Pakistan.

You have a giant dog breed that has always been bred for guarding, aggressive and dog intolerant temperaments - even in their native country they are kept kennelled or outside once mature, they aren't family pets. IMO they have no place in urban UK with inexperienced owners.

Apparently a good breeder in Pakistan of these dogs - https://www.facebook.com/Bullykuttaassyria/? lots of information on their FB page.

ETA - Found it interesting how they don't have cropped ears. Yet in fighting circles, they do.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse (Feb 9, 2014)

.


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

ShibaPup said:


> I've spent a while reading through Bully Kutta UK groups.
> 
> Even in those groups people who own them are saying they have to be kept separate from their other dogs they've grown up with - especially once mature.
> 
> ...


I agree, there is no place for such a dog in the UK. I don't care how much 'breed enthusiasts love their 'breed'.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse (Feb 9, 2014)

rocco33 said:


> I agree, there is no place for such a dog in the UK. I don't care how much 'breed enthusiasts love their 'breed'.


So what would you like to see happen and to which breeds? Is it just the Bully or are there other breeds you don't want allowed in the UK?


----------



## picaresque (Jun 25, 2009)

ShibaPup said:


> Apparently a good breeder in Pakistan of these dogs - https://www.facebook.com/Bullykuttaassyria/? lots of information on their FB page.


Interesting that the dog featured in their logo appears to have such bad ectropion you can't even see his eyes. So badass...








https://www.facebook.com/Bullykutta...895560238385/1699906333570641/?type=1&theater


----------



## Guest (Nov 25, 2017)

I havent read all thread but I think people put to much into the Bully kutta and im not even sure he is one . What happened is horrible and tragic but what about the other dog ? should BSL include all ridgebacks and staffs as well? ( not including the ones already pts as they look to somebody like a type).
I watched the video eventually and was horrified when the useless owner got hold of his dog just to walk away in the middle of the fight and basically let his dog finish the job and I dont believe he thought the dog would follow him in that state of excitement.
I dont blame the dog walker but she didnt even try. my heart goes to poor dog and owners but as an owner I would not want my dog off-lead with 4 other dogs what if something goes wrong? she should have called the beagle back before he reached the 2 out of control out of leads/collars dog maybe she tried.
I hope the owner gets persecuted but the law is bad enough without making other innocent dogs pay the price for their looks.


----------



## Katalyst (Aug 11, 2015)

picaresque said:


> Interesting that the dog featured in their logo appears to have such bad ectropion you can't even see his eyes. So badass...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I went and watched a bunch of videos and stalked a few Facebook pages to learn a bit more about these bully kuttas (of which the dog in the video barely resembles anyway) and I'm pretty shocked at how poorly structured all of the dogs I saw footage of are. High rears, ramrod straight legs, ectropion, crappy skin.... aside from the hideous temperament.


----------



## Burrowzig (Feb 18, 2009)

Whiteshadow said:


> I dont blame the dog walker but she didnt even try. my heart goes to poor dog and owners but as an owner I would not want my dog off-lead with 4 other dogs what if something goes wrong? she should have called the beagle back before he reached the 2 out of control out of leads/collars dog maybe she tried


Apparently she did call him back; the owner of the dogs that killed him said she did, anyway, but beagle didn't recall. Although what those dogs was totally out of proportion, a dog (the beagle) that doesn't come back when called really shouldn't be off the lead in the first place, either. 
My Ziggy was a ball maniac and I had to keep her on lead if there was someone else's ball game going on within sight or hearing.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Burrowzig said:


> Apparently she did call him back; the owner of the dogs that killed him said she did, anyway, but beagle didn't recall.


When talking about breed traits, not uncommon for beagles. However there are some who do have perfect recall.

I think another thing which hasn't been mentioned is something I am aware of with 2 american bulldogs. They are taken out individually simply because if something happens, a single person is not capable of "controlling" them. I do not expect something to happen but prefer to make sure if it does I am at least able to handle them.


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

Goblin said:


> I think another thing which hasn't been mentioned is something I am aware of with 2 american bulldogs. They are taken out individually simply because if something happens, a single person is not capable of handling them. I do not expect something to happen but prefer to make sure if it does I am at least able to handle them.


I agree...All it would take is for them to kick off together and then you don't have much hope of keeping control of both dogs.
As usual this has sparked the usuals trying to blame the Beagle and the walker (everyone has a blown recall at least once in their life, unless the dog is a repeat offender) which is ridiculous IMO..OK the Beagle should have recalled straight away and shouldn't have tried to steal a ball (apparently) but there is no excuse for the level of violence these dogs inflicted.

The only person to blame is the owner of these two out of control dangerous dogs - He shouldn't be walking them together, he shouldn't be walking them on a field where you are likely to meet off leash dogs and he had zero idea of how to stop dogs fighting! And considering he is the type to own a cropped BK,(again apparently, I don't believe that dog is any more than a mutt dog but there ya go) without realising what these dogs are about it was a tragedy waiting to happen


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

I really do not see how anyone can blame the owner of the beagle. Why should it have been on the lead. It was a nice dog and it was good with other dogs and reasonably obedient. Some breeds will never have 100 percent recall, that does not mean it should have a miserable life on the lead and not be allowed to play with its friends. I did not see the video of what happened. Do I gather there was a ball involved. I have to say I am absolutely sick of people with ball launchers thinking it is ok to hurl the blooming thing around other dogs. It is so antisocial and horrible for other dogs that are constantly getting wound up by it.


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

StormyThai said:


> I agree...All it would take is for them to kick off together and then you don't have much hope of keeping control of both dogs.
> As usual this has sparked the usuals trying to blame the Beagle and the walker (everyone has a blown recall at least once in their life, unless the dog is a repeat offender) which is ridiculous IMO..OK the Beagle should have recalled straight away and shouldn't have tried to steal a ball (apparently) but there is no excuse for the level of violence these dogs inflicted.
> 
> The only person to blame is the owner of these two out of control dangerous dogs - He shouldn't be walking them together, he shouldn't be walking them on a field where you are likely to meet off leash dogs and he had zero idea of how to stop dogs fighting! And considering he is the type to own a cropped BK,(again apparently, I don't believe that dog is any more than a mutt dog but there ya go) without realising what these dogs are about it was a tragedy waiting to happen


It's absolutely NOT the beagle owner or walker's fault IMO, & I'm the first to complain about offlead dogs pestering mine, but like has already been said many times here, the vast majority of dogs don't react the way these dogs did, they looked predatory.



Katalyst said:


> I went and watched a bunch of videos and stalked a few Facebook pages to learn a bit more about these bully kuttas (of which the dog in the video barely resembles anyway) and I'm pretty shocked at how poorly structured all of the dogs I saw footage of are. *High rears, ramrod straight legs, ectropion, crappy skin.... aside from the hideous temperament.*


I think the question should be who _wouldn't_ want one? They sound like such an amazing breed*

*sarcasm


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

Burrowzig said:


> Apparently she did call him back; the owner of the dogs that killed him said she did, anyway, but beagle didn't recall. Although what those dogs was totally out of proportion, a dog (the beagle) that doesn't come back when called really shouldn't be off the lead in the first place, either.
> My Ziggy was a ball maniac and I had to keep her on lead if there was someone else's ball game going on within sight or hearing.


I think this is the problem. We don't know what the true story is, I suspect both will want to lay a degree of blame on the other and IMO, the dog walker was not vigilent and, typical of dog walkers around here, just let a large group of dogs run around and make their own fun while not considering other park users. However, even if the beagle did go for the dog's ball, a scrap, even if it resulted in injury that required medical intervention, may have been understandable but to tear the beagle apart in seconds is not. I know a couple of huskies that killed a small dog. The case went to court and the huskies were pts.


----------



## Jamesgoeswalkies (May 8, 2014)

The trouble is of course, the more a 'new' breed becomes discussed as 'not a dog for novices' or 'not an ideal pet' or can be described as a 'guardian breed' offering 'Bravery, Protection and Loyalty' the more certain people will want one. Bully breeds are old hat. Too soft. The 'look what I can handle' brigade will be googling the breed already.

Reminds me of the guy near us who refuses to put his dog on the lead when he walks from his house, down and across a busy road and towards the woods. It's all about his ego with little thought for the dog. 'Look what I can do ....' Idiot. 

These sort of attacks can never be solved through education alone for there will always those who presume that it does not apply to them. They cannot be prevented by listing breeds either. Tougher sentences for dog attacks should be brought in. At the moment the law can give you six months for having your dog out of control. Let's make that 5 years if your dog kills another in an attack such as this. And let's have a hotline for reporting small attacks. And lets have police take it seriously.

J


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

rocco33 said:


> I think this is the problem. We don't know what the true story is, I suspect both will want to lay a degree of blame on the other and IMO, *the dog walker was not vigilent and, typical of dog walkers around here, just let a large group of dogs run around and make their own fun while not considering other park users*. However, even if the beagle did go for the dog's ball, a scrap, even if it resulted in injury that required medical intervention, may have been understandable but to tear the beagle apart in seconds is not. I know a couple of huskies that killed a small dog. The case went to court and the huskies were pts.


That is a very good point, I know a lot of the ones round here are guilty of the same.

I didn't want to do it but I watched the video, the poor beagle was fuzzed out & it was still very difficult to watch, but those dogs weren't scrapping because a strange dog had come into their space & put them over threshold, that was way beyond even a severe telling off.


----------



## ShibaPup (Mar 22, 2017)

The Beagle didn't deserve what happened - those two individual dogs clearly aren't safe and didn't react in a normal way. To see a dog as prey like that is very worrying predatory behaviour.

What person can watch FIVE dogs? Unless they're all on lead in front of you. Or you're in an enclosed, secure field (you can't watch them all but you know they're safe) I can't see how anyone can watch that many dogs at the same time. I do think there needs to be stricter regulations around dog walkers and the amount of dogs they are allowed to walk at once and the qualifications they have.

Anyone can set themselves up as a dog walker - there's one near me, he parks his van at the park and just lets the dogs out! While he stays by the van!! I've saw this a few times. It scares me so I quickly leave with Lily - no way can he watch and control all of those dogs.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse (Feb 9, 2014)

Blitz said:


> I really do not see how anyone can blame the owner of the beagle. Why should it have been on the lead. It was a nice dog and it was good with other dogs and reasonably obedient. *Some breeds will never have 100 percent recall, that does not mean it should have a miserable life on the lead and not be allowed to play with its friends.* I did not see the video of what happened. Do I gather there was a ball involved. I have to say I am absolutely sick of people with ball launchers thinking it is ok to hurl the blooming thing around other dogs. It is so antisocial and horrible for other dogs that are constantly getting wound up by it.


Lots of dogs don't want to play with other dogs and being on a lead does not mean having a miserable life.


----------



## ShibaPup (Mar 22, 2017)

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Lots of dogs don't want to play with other dogs and being on a lead does not mean having a miserable life.


I agree - Lily is always on lead in public, she's never played with any other dog but she's happy - loves her walks


----------



## picaresque (Jun 25, 2009)

Blitz said:


> I have to say I am absolutely sick of people with ball launchers thinking it is ok to hurl the blooming thing around other dogs. It is so antisocial and horrible for other dogs that are constantly getting wound up by it.


Argh, yes.


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

simplysardonic said:


> That is a very good point, I know a lot of the ones round here are guilty of the same.
> 
> I didn't want to do it but I watched the video, the poor beagle was fuzzed out & it was still very difficult to watch, but those dogs weren't scrapping because a strange dog had come into their space & put them over threshold, that was way beyond even a severe telling off.


Yes.....more akin to lions 'playing' with their fresh kill prior to tucking in! scary really.


----------



## Dogloverlou (Dec 8, 2013)

Blitz said:


> I really do not see how anyone can blame the owner of the beagle. Why should it have been on the lead. It was a nice dog and it was good with other dogs and reasonably obedient. Some breeds will never have 100 percent recall, that does not mean it should have a miserable life on the lead and not be allowed to play with its friends. I did not see the video of what happened. Do I gather there was a ball involved. I have to say I am absolutely sick of people with ball launchers thinking it is ok to hurl the blooming thing around other dogs. It is so antisocial and horrible for other dogs that are constantly getting wound up by it.


Equally other dog walkers are entitled to walk without being accosted by a loose dog. Just because a dog is super friendly doesn't mean it has the right to mix & mingle with whoever it takes a liking too. Whilst it's not really advisable to walk reactive/DA dogs in a park setting where other dogs regularly frequent, again, those same owners still have the right to do so and if they're keeping their dog on lead and out of the way they shouldn't have to put up with your friendly dog just saying hello.


----------



## Guest (Nov 26, 2017)

Whiteshadow said:


> I havent read all thread but I think people put to much into the Bully kutta and im not even sure he is one . What happened is horrible and tragic but what about the other dog ? should BSL include all ridgebacks and staffs as well? ( not including the ones already pts as they look to somebody like a type).


 No one in promoting BSL, if anything this incident shows the ridiculousness of BSL because it doesn't included breeds like BK which are far more specialist than any pitbull ever hoped to be. 
BSL is bullshit. The law should not be breed specific at all, BUT the law should be DEED specific, and as already mentioned, there had been incidents with these dogs previously that were not addressed properly.

I agree with @Jamesgoeswalkies the laws about keeping dogs (of all breeds) under control need to be enforced, and there need to be far stricter penalties for repeat offenders. Everything we know about this sort of incident tells us that dogs like this don't just wake up one day and go kill the friendly beagle in the dog park. They build up to it. If the previous incidents of these dogs being out of control were taken seriously by the relevant authorities, it possibly could have saved the beagle's life. At the very least, there would be an extensive record to draw on when it comes to sentencing the owners. When people start seeing irresponsible behavior punished more severely, it might motivate them to take their own dog owning responsibilities more seriously.



Whiteshadow said:


> I watched the video eventually and was horrified when the useless owner got hold of his dog just to walk away in the middle of the fight and basically let his dog finish the job and I dont believe he thought the dog would follow him in that state of excitement.
> I dont blame the dog walker but she didnt even try. my heart goes to poor dog and owners but as an owner I would not want my dog off-lead with 4 other dogs what if something goes wrong? she should have called the beagle back before he reached the 2 out of control out of leads/collars dog maybe she tried.
> I hope the owner gets persecuted but the law is bad enough without making other innocent dogs pay the price for their looks.


There is no blaming the beagle or the beagle's walker. No, it's not wise to allow your dog to run up to another dog, but the response of these dogs was so completely out of place, it's akin to a person taking a gun out and shooting someone in the face for texting while walking down the sidewalk and accidentally bumping in to them. There is NO excuse for that sort of reaction, and there is no place in a civilized world for the sort of dog (of any breed I stress) who would kill another dog for invading their space.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

StormyThai said:


> .OK the Beagle should have recalled straight away and shouldn't have tried to steal a ball (apparently) but there is no excuse for the level of violence these dogs inflicted.


I agree, as the owner of "dangerous dogs" I am too well aware that my dogs have to be under control at all times no matter what provocation and there is the crunch. Not breed but owner responsibilitry. That includes taking responsibility for what breed you actually get.

I keep seeing people saying nobody is talking about BSL while restricting breeds based on "suitability" or the like. They are the same, the only different is putting it into law. Education must be front and foremost if we are to prevent this and other dog based incidents.


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

rottiepointerhouse said:


> Lots of dogs don't want to play with other dogs and being on a lead does not mean having a miserable life.


Sorry, but I do not and never will agree with you over this. There are times when dogs should be on lead but they should not need to be on all the time just in case they get too close to someone else's dog. If you are walking a dog in a public place then it should have a temperament suitable for meeting dogs and people.

I have just been out with my dogs. One was ranging around enjoying sniffing and one was wanting to play with a football. If they had been on the lead they would have covered a fraction of the ground they covered and had a fraction of the fun. On the other hand I do sometimes use a flexi lead if we are somewhere with rabbits!

by the way, I said playing with other dogs as that is what that particular beagle enjoyed.


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

My dog has no need or want to meet random strangers, be that people or dogs...my dog has every right to be in a public place as any other dog!


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

Dogloverlou said:


> Equally other dog walkers are entitled to walk without being accosted by a loose dog. Just because a dog is super friendly doesn't mean it has the right to mix & mingle with whoever it takes a liking too. Whilst it's not really advisable to walk reactive/DA dogs in a park setting where other dogs regularly frequent, again, those same owners still have the right to do so and if they're keeping their dog on lead and out of the way they shouldn't have to put up with your friendly dog just saying hello.


Or equally neither should my friendly dog have to put up with dogs lunging around on the end of their lead barking and snarling or balls being flung by her and upsetting her - but if we walk in a public place we probably have to put up with all sorts of things happening that are not ideal.



StormyThai said:


> My dog has no need or want to meet random strangers, be that people or dogs...my dog has every right to be in a public place as any other dog!


So long as he does not kill another dog that happens to come into his space. Of course loose dogs should not approach on lead dogs but it does and always will happen so a dog that is going to kill a dog that does it has no right to be out in our society. Some people keep their dogs on the lead because they are nervous to let them off but actually love them to meet another dog on or off lead. The dogs that killed the beagle were off lead weren't they. Still not seen the final video.


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

Blitz said:


> Sorry, but I do not and never will agree with you over this. There are times when dogs should be on lead but they should not need to be on all the time just in case they get too close to someone else's dog. *If you are walking a dog in a public place then it should have a temperament suitable for meeting dogs and people.*
> 
> I have just been out with my dogs. One was ranging around enjoying sniffing and one was wanting to play with a football. If they had been on the lead they would have covered a fraction of the ground they covered and had a fraction of the fun. On the other hand I do sometimes use a flexi lead if we are somewhere with rabbits!
> 
> by the way, I said playing with other dogs as that is what that particular beagle enjoyed.


What does this even mean? Loads of dogs aren't interested in meeting strangers and strange dogs, does this mean they shouldn't be out in a public place? Granted if they are likely to rip another dog apart like these dogs did then I'd clearly agree with you, but the overwhelming majority of dogs including most so called 'anti social' dogs don't fall anywhere near that extreme catagory.


----------



## Dogloverlou (Dec 8, 2013)

Blitz said:


> Or equally neither should my friendly dog have to put up with dogs lunging around on the end of their lead barking and snarling or balls being flung by her and upsetting her - but if we walk in a public place we probably have to put up with all sorts of things happening that are not ideal.
> 
> So long as he does not kill another dog that happens to come into his space. Of course loose dogs should not approach on lead dogs but it does and always will happen so a dog that is going to kill a dog that does it has no right to be out in our society. Some people keep their dogs on the lead because they are nervous to let them off but actually love them to meet another dog on or off lead*. The dogs that killed the beagle were off lead weren't they*. Still not seen the final video.


If someone was playing ball with their dog though and that dog was under control, enjoying the game etc, not sure why it would have any effect on you & your dogs? Just keep yours away. Of course, someone deliberately invading your space to play with their own dog is just rude. But the majority of people who frequent parks, find a spot to play at and keep themselves to themselves. Also, as long as a reactive dog is on lead and kept away from yours why does that again effect you? On the very rare occasions I use a park with Cash, we find a secluded corner and we stay put there, training, playing, keeping ourselves to ourselves. Just because we're at a park though doesn't mean we need/want to socialise.

According to what the owner of the two attacking dogs says, his were both on lead but slipped their collars hen the Beagle approached.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse (Feb 9, 2014)

Blitz said:


> Sorry, but I do not and never will agree with you over this. There are times when dogs should be on lead but they should not need to be on all the time just in case they get too close to someone else's dog. If you are walking a dog in a public place then it should have a temperament suitable for meeting dogs and people.
> 
> I have just been out with my dogs. One was ranging around enjoying sniffing and one was wanting to play with a football. If they had been on the lead they would have covered a fraction of the ground they covered and had a fraction of the fun. On the other hand I do sometimes use a flexi lead if we are somewhere with rabbits!
> 
> by the way, I said playing with other dogs as that is what that particular beagle enjoyed.


To be fair Blitz I'd be astonished if we did ever agree on anything but here is how I see it. Your dogs may enjoy ranging and sniffing, my dogs do too but they can still do that on a long lead, even on a short one if you go with them. Your dogs may want to play with a football, one of mine loves tennis balls and the other two don't. One of mine who spends a lot of time on lead loves to carry sticks, the bigger the better and he can do that on a lead. So whilst you may feel your dogs would have a miserable life if they couldn't get off lead and play with friends a lot of other dog owners do not agree and frankly it is insulting to those of us who put a lot of time and effort into keeping our on leads dogs well exercised, stimulated and happy to suggest a life on lead is miserable. It might be for "some" dogs but for many it isn't and for many it can mean the difference between safety or causing an accident or getting mauled.


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

labradrk said:


> What does this even mean? Loads of dogs aren't interested in meeting strangers and strange dogs, does this mean they shouldn't be out in a public place? Granted if they are likely to rip another dog apart like these dogs did then I'd clearly agree with you, but the overwhelming majority of dogs including most so called 'anti social' dogs don't fall anywhere near that extreme catagory.


Of course not, but they should be able to tolerate an adult or child or dog encroaching in their space. We have only been talking about dogs this time but what about the brats that race up to dogs and fling their arms round their necks or maybe are just walking by and trip over their feet and land in the dog's space. A lot of people live in busy areas where this sort of thing is going to happen whether you like it or not so an antisocial dog is no problem at all but if it can't cope with normal busy life surely it is a problem


----------



## rottiepointerhouse (Feb 9, 2014)

Blitz said:


> Of course not, but they should be able to tolerate an adult or child or dog encroaching in their space. We have only been talking about dogs this time but what about the brats that race up to dogs and fling their arms round their necks or maybe are just walking by and trip over their feet and land in the dog's space. A lot of people live in busy areas where this sort of thing is going to happen whether you like it or not so an antisocial dog is no problem at all but if it can't cope with normal busy life surely it is a problem


That is down to management. My last rottie didn't tolerate humans she didn't know well in her space so she was kept on a lead and muzzled unless we were in remote areas with full vision and there were two of us there, one to watch her and one to watch out for anything approaching. If another dog came towards us we simple got off the path and sat her down while they went by or if they were insistent on trying to get to her the 2nd handler removed them and held on to them until the owner came and got them. No drama, no big deal.


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

Blitz said:


> So long as he does not kill another dog that happens to come into his space. Of course loose dogs should not approach on lead dogs but it does and always will happen so a dog that is going to kill a dog that does it has no right to be out in our society. Some people keep their dogs on the lead because they are nervous to let them off but actually love them to meet another dog on or off lead. The dogs that killed the beagle were off lead weren't they. Still not seen the final video.


That's not what you originally said though.
I agree that if a dog is likely to cause serious injury or death then they should not be in public areas...but you said that if a dog doesn't have a suitable temperament for meeting people and dogs they shouldn't be walked in public.
Many, many, many dogs have zero need or want to meet and greet strange dogs or people, that does not mean they can't be out in public.

It's great that you have dogs that love to meet and greet everyone, but those dogs that don't love to are still having fulfilled lives.


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

rottiepointerhouse said:


> That is down to management. My last rottie didn't tolerate humans she didn't know well in her space so she was kept on a lead and muzzled unless we were in remote areas with full vision and there were two of us there, one to watch her and one to watch out for anything approaching. If another dog came towards us we simple got off the path and sat her down while they went by or if they were insistent on trying to get to her the 2nd handler removed them and held on to them until the owner came and got them. No drama, no big deal.


That is fine, you took precautions, but you must know you are in the minority with your dog care. It is not even reasonable to expect that most owners will even attempt to do that. I have to say too that if my dog approached a dog that was not happy about it I would be quite happy for the owner to repel her in any non violent way they saw fit but if their dog attacked her I would be more than miffed. Though maybe you remember my story of Candy marching along a canal tow path in front of me and refusing to stop when I told her and trying to march through a group of loose dogs. A staffie went for her, she was flung onto the edge of a boat and almost into the canal. The owner of the other dogs rescued her and I apologised for my dog disobeying me. The couple were gobsmacked and could not thank me enough and were very apologetic that they had somehow come out without any leads or that dog would have been on the lead. It happens sometimes and it is one of those things. Candy usually stopped dead when told and their dog was usually on the lead. No real harm done except a nervous Candy round other dogs for a while but it was her fault in my opinion.


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

StormyThai said:


> That's not what you originally said though.
> I agree that if a dog is likely to cause serious injury or death then they should not be in public areas...but you said that if a dog doesn't have a suitable temperament for meeting people and dogs they shouldn't be walked in public.
> Many, many, many dogs have zero need or want to meet and greet strange dogs or people, that does not mean they can't be out in public.
> 
> It's great that you have dogs that love to meet and greet everyone, but those dogs that don't love to are still having fulfilled lives.


A suitable temperament in that they will not attack the people and dogs they inevitably meet! Not that they have to love everyone.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse (Feb 9, 2014)

Blitz said:


> That is fine, you took precautions, but you must know you are in the minority with your dog care. It is not even reasonable to expect that most owners will even attempt to do that. I have to say too that if my dog approached a dog that was not happy about it I would be quite happy for the owner to repel her in any non violent way they saw fit but if their dog attacked her I would be more than miffed. Though maybe you remember my story of Candy marching along a canal tow path in front of me and refusing to stop when I told her and trying to march through a group of loose dogs. A staffie went for her, she was flung onto the edge of a boat and almost into the canal. The owner of the other dogs rescued her and I apologised for my dog disobeying me. The couple were gobsmacked and could not thank me enough and were very apologetic that they had somehow come out without any leads or that dog would have been on the lead. It happens sometimes and it is one of those things. Candy usually stopped dead when told and their dog was usually on the lead. No real harm done except a nervous Candy round other dogs for a while but it was her fault in my opinion.


No I don't believe I am in the minority for people who know full well they have a dog and human aggressive dog. Being able to manage her safely was one of the things we had to carefully consider when deciding to take her on. We don't meet many dog walkers these days because we are fortunate to be able to walk in forests and heaths and moorland away from other people but when we are occasionally out in more frequented areas we often come across people with a dog on lead and muzzled who step off the path and call out an apology saying their dog is not friendly. I always thank them and say don't worry we've been there.


----------



## MiffyMoo (Sep 15, 2015)

rottiepointerhouse said:


> No I don't believe I am in the minority for people who know full well they have a dog and human aggressive dog. Being able to manage her safely was one of the things we had to carefully consider when deciding to take her on. We don't meet many dog walkers these days because we are fortunate to be able to walk in forests and heaths and moorland away from other people but when we are occasionally out in more frequented areas we often come across people with a dog on lead and muzzled who step off the path and call out an apology saying their dog is not friendly. I always thank them and say don't worry we've been there.


I would say that the most vigilant dog walkers I have met are the ones with reactive dogs. I always walk my guys where there are very few other walkers, and as such have come across a number of other walkers who take the same precautions that I do.

The problems arise when others are there who feel that it's their dog's right to bomb up to ours. In my eyes, those aren't great owners as they are willingly putting the safety of their dogs into someone else's hands. No, my reactive dog will never try and hurt another, but Dex has stepped in a few times to pin it down if it won't leave. The worst we've had is an air snap when the other dog growled at him when he was using his body to block Lola.

I also feel that it's my job to make my dog feel as safe and comfortable as possible, so I will get cross with dog walkers who allow their dog to barge up, and if someone dares suggest that my dog shouldn't be out in public if she can't handle unwanted attention, they will be told exactly what I think of them


----------



## Guest (Nov 26, 2017)

To an extent, I see what Blitz is saying. Maybe this is my age showing, but sometimes I feel like we make too many excuses for what boils down to unsound temperament. 

I'm not talking expecting dogs to tolerate everything and anything without a peep. I'm talking about news stories of a dog ripping a child's face off because the kid went to pet him. And then you get all these apologists saying kids need to be taught how to interact with dogs, and dogs shouldn't have to tolerate kids in their face blah blah blah. 
That's all absolutely true, but let's not forget to address the fact that the dog had a completely over the top, out of proportion reaction to a common trigger. The reality is, the world is full of children, and not all children are dog savvy. And a dog who would react so excessively is not a sound dog. 
A nip? Sure. My own dog bit me right through the lip when I was a kid. My mom told me to quit pestering the dog and get a towel because I was bleeding all over her kitchen floor. No sympathy for me, the dog was never even reprimanded. He had warned me, I kept pestering, he bit. He didn't maul, he didn't keep biting, he just told me off.

In the same way, I don't have a problem with a dog who doesn't tolerate rude dogs and will even resort to a bite. Hell, depending on the owner's control, I wouldn't even bother to muzzle. But to kill another dog over that? Absolutely unacceptable. 
Space invader dogs are a massively common trigger, and we can bemoan how annoying it is (and it is), but at the end of the day, we can't expect it to never happen, and if your dog is likely to go postal over a space invader dog, that's a massively problematic temperament issue - and not of the space invader dog.


----------



## Zaros (Nov 24, 2009)

Whiteshadow said:


> I watched the video eventually and was horrified when the useless owner got hold of his dog just to walk away in the middle of the fight and basically let his dog finish the job.


I've watched the video over and over again, not because I'm a ghoul, but because, initially, I thought exactly the same as you.
But after several views, I'm now convinced he walked away because he realised there was nothing more that could be done for the Beagle.
It was already dead..


----------



## Guest (Nov 26, 2017)

ouesi said:


> I think it does far more harm to a breed to say "you can make it work" than It does to just talk straight and accept that some breeds are specialist breeds and not meant to be in a pet home living a pet life.
> 
> As for LGD who don't cut it as guardians, responsible breeders take them back, assess why they didn't work out (could be temperament or could be a set-up and stock management issue), then they place the dog responsibly based on the reason he/she didn't work out.


I wonder how that will actually be done. Let´s say only 1-2 pups make it as a guardian, will the breeder take the rest 4-6 dogs back? And if the breeder has had more than one litter, pretty soon he/she will end up having a dozen or so dogs back. Call me a cynic, but this will happen only if there are only very small numbers of dogs to start with. Here the norm is that we get maybe one litter per year, if that And from that maybe 1-2 pups will be used as a working dog, and the rest will be used a pets. Naturally all circumstances have to be right. But so far they have been good. Even then a dog is sometimes taken back (owner falls ill etc. ).

But on a larger scale, I doubt very much that any of this "breeder takes a dog back" will happen. Ideally that would be the case, but idealism doesn´t help much, unfortunately. Why else the number of LGDs that were culled was around 40% in US? (Hopefully this number is lower now, this is an old study I am referring to).

For me the best practice to prevent an LGD to end up as an unhappy, unprovided problem dog is to ensure maybe through a lisence that only people, who can provide for the dog can have it and all breeders have an obligation to take the dog back, if something happens. That means naturally that the number of LGDs will be Limited, but so be it. At least this way we will be able to maintain those great abilities of a genuine LGD.



ShibaPup said:


> You have a giant dog breed that has always been bred for guarding, aggressive and dog intolerant temperaments - even in their native country they are kept kennelled or outside once mature, they aren't family pets. IMO they have no place in urban UK with inexperienced owners.
> .


I hope you are not talking about mist LGDs, as that just is not true. They have been bread for guarding, but they are traditionally not aggessive and can even tolerate other dogs. Their job is to defend the flock/ owner/ property mostly through deterring the predators By barking or marking the area. Physical confrontation are rare and often no one will get seriously enjured even then.Aggressive dogs don´t make good working dogs either.

In their native countries (e.g. Serbia and Mecedonia for sars) they live in the villages with the flock. All dogs are usually kept outside in kennels, not just LGDs. Life is a bit tougher in these poor countries and people just don´t have facilities like we. Naturally there are bad breeders in these countries too, who breed the dogs for fighting. But that is not the reason these dogs have been tradionally bred and there are still responsible dog breeders in these original countries, and the dogs are bred for courage, ability to guard and stamina.

Would these dogs have chance to be happy in England? I agree with you, no, as people just will not understand and respect them. The legislation (=dogs can´t even bark, if some one complains about it) is insane IMO. We have already experience about a "devil" dog on PF. That should be an example for us all.


----------



## Guest (Nov 26, 2017)

Zaros said:


> I've watched the video over and over again, not because I'm a ghoul, but because, initially, I thought exactly the same as you.
> But after several views, I'm now convinced he walked away because he realised there was nothing more that could be done for the Beagle.
> It was already dead..


I think the poor beagle was still alive as I saw movement .


----------



## Guest (Nov 26, 2017)

ShibaPup said:


> I agree - Lily is always on lead in public, she's never played with any other dog but she's happy - loves her walks


Why dont you never let her play with other dogs? what about socialisation? 
sorry its off-topic but had to ask. some dogs you have to manage on lead but surely thats not Lilys case??


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

Whiteshadow said:


> Why dont you never let her play with other dogs? what about socialisation?
> sorry its off-topic but had to ask. some dogs you have to manage on lead but surely thats not Lilys case??


Risk factor. For me letting them 'play' with some random dogs and potentially ending up in situations that you hear about (and see if you walk in busier places) constantly with loose out of control dogs. I'm a simple girl that likes a simple life and on balance, it's just not worth it. Especially if you have a breed whereby if anything happens it will ALWAYS be your fault.

It's far easier to mitigate any risk by repelling and avoiding strange dogs. More so because many are rather deluded about their dogs "friendliness" and behaviour.


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

Zaros said:


> I've watched the video over and over again, not because I'm a ghoul, but because, initially, I thought exactly the same as you.
> But after several views, I'm now convinced he walked away because he realised there was nothing more that could be done for the Beagle.
> It was already dead..


I haven't watched it more than once, but that is what I thought, in fact, I think the beagle was already dead long before the video was taken. I read it was taken by a passerby rather than the dog walker. Looking at the two dog's actions, they had already done the deed and were just toying with the body. In spite of the owners protests I do not believe this is the first time these dogs have shown aggressive behaviour.


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

Whiteshadow said:


> Why dont you never let her play with other dogs? what about socialisation?
> sorry its off-topic but had to ask. some dogs you have to manage on lead but surely thats not Lilys case??


Also, not all dogs like to play, particularly as they get older. Why should they - would you expect all adults to talk to everyone they ever meet?


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

Whiteshadow said:


> Why dont you never let her play with other dogs? what about socialisation?
> sorry its off-topic but had to ask. some dogs you have to manage on lead but surely thats not Lilys case??


Socialisation is about understanding you share the same space with a variety of species including dogs and humans...and respecting everyone's space. It's far better to have a dog neutral dog..one that ignores every species and concentrates on their owner...which through all @ShibaPup posts it sounds like Lily is doing just fine on this!


----------



## Guest (Nov 26, 2017)

Wait. I dont critisize anyone who has to manage their dog on lead from various reasons. Im just curious why @ShibaPup that has a puppy from a similar breed to mine says Lily never played with another dog.
I know my girl needs her off-lead time as very high energy but after hard work from day 1 she earned my trust. I think every dog deserves a chance to earn his freedom.


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

Whiteshadow said:


> Wait. I dont critisize anyone who has to manage their dog on lead from various reasons. Im just curious why @ShibaPup that has a puppy from a similar breed to mine says Lily never played with another dog.
> I know my girl needs her off-lead time as very high energy but after hard work from day 1 she earned my trust. I think every dog deserves a chance to earn his freedom.


Perhaps Liliy doesn't want to play with other dogs, fwiw I don't allow Thai to meet and play with unknown dogs...he doesn't want to play, he would much rather have a game with me.


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

Whiteshadow said:


> Wait. I dont critisize anyone who has to manage their dog on lead from various reasons. Im just curious why @ShibaPup that has a puppy from a similar breed to mine says Lily never played with another dog.
> I know my girl needs her off-lead time as very high energy but after hard work from day 1 she earned my trust. I think every dog deserves a chance to earn his freedom.


It's not about earning trust...you give your dog off lead time others prefer to mentally stimulate a dog which from today's post on another thread is more than needed for the majority of breeds...

There are plenty of things dogs can still do on walks whilst on a long line or lead...that is more stimulating than just walking or running freely!


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

Whiteshadow said:


> Wait. I dont critisize anyone who has to manage their dog on lead from various reasons. Im just curious why @ShibaPup that has a puppy from a similar breed to mine says Lily never played with another dog.
> I know my girl needs her off-lead time as very high energy but after hard work from day 1 she earned my trust. I think every dog deserves a chance to earn his freedom.


My dogs are off lead most of the time but they have no desire to play with other dogs, they would much rather interact with me or explore and sniff around me (close by). It is irritating that others think they should 'play'. None of my dogs have been neutered so they mature into full adults. Why should they have to play?


----------



## ShibaPup (Mar 22, 2017)

Whiteshadow said:


> Why dont you never let her play with other dogs? what about socialisation?
> sorry its off-topic but had to ask. some dogs you have to manage on lead but surely thats not Lilys case??


1. I don't trust your average owners knowledge or training skills - "He's friendly" aka he's rude and I can't call him back.
2. I don't want Lily picking up bad or rude habits from obnoxious rude dogs.
3. I don't want her practising unwanted behaviours - running up to people, running up to on lead dogs, bogging off and while Lily has never done any of these, a leash is physical reassurance that she can't.
4. I don't want Lily to have bad experiences with dogs - we have enough dogs barking at her from across the street, I'd like to keep Lily as dog neutral as possible. I have a far better chance of fending off an unwanted dog if Lily is on lead.
5. I simply don't know anyone with a dog who has good social skills.

Lily is MY responsibility - god forbid anything happened, no doubt it would be Lily's fault regardless.
I keep her on lead for my peace of mind - she's controlled and we have fun together, her focus is on me and I've worked bloody hard to get her focus. People it is still a work in progress because everyone is amazing.

Lily is a friendly, happy go lucky dog and I'd like to keep it that way.


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

My lot don't socialise with strange dogs but we do walk with a few other dogs that they get along with, & that is after careful introductions.


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

Whiteshadow said:


> Wait. I dont critisize anyone who has to manage their dog on lead from various reasons. Im just curious why @ShibaPup that has a puppy from a similar breed to mine says Lily never played with another dog.
> I know my girl needs her off-lead time as very high energy but after hard work from day 1 she earned my trust. I think every dog deserves a chance to earn his freedom.


Ideally, you want your dog to be focused on you, not on earning his freedom.

My JR has no wish to socialise with other dogs. Our Staffy would, I'm sure, but I don't want her flying round the park with other dogs, oblivious to my presence.


----------



## Jamesgoeswalkies (May 8, 2014)

simplysardonic said:


> My lot don't socialise with strange dogs but we do walk with a few other dogs that they get along with, & that is after careful introductions.


I would generally say this is what my walks are like.

My adult dogs have very little interest in playing with unknown dogs ...all are off lead and non are reactive ....they love to run though and play and do fun games with me. At home they will sometimes have a bit of rough and tumble when we have dogs they know round. My youngster is more excitable around unknown dogs ...and guess what ...I don't let her play yet. 

J


----------



## MiffyMoo (Sep 15, 2015)

rocco33 said:


> Also, not all dogs like to play, particularly as they get older. Why should they - would you expect all adults to talk to everyone they ever meet?


My bitch only likes dogs that she chooses and that she has had time to get to know. Random meet ups are certainly not her idea of a good time


----------



## MiffyMoo (Sep 15, 2015)

Whiteshadow said:


> Wait. I dont critisize anyone who has to manage their dog on lead from various reasons. Im just curious why @ShibaPup that has a puppy from a similar breed to mine says Lily never played with another dog.
> I know my girl needs her off-lead time as very high energy but after hard work from day 1 she earned my trust. I think every dog deserves a chance to earn his freedom.


My dogs are very high energy, but cannot go off lead. I make up for it by long walks and brain training


----------



## Guest (Nov 26, 2017)

my girl does not play with every other dog and her focus is on me.she is very selective nowadays and sometimes dont play with other dogs for days but its joy to watch when she find a good match.I do think that exposing her to other dogs (and different people,traffic, noices etc) build her confidence and shaped her personality not without lessons we learned. I do believe its good for dogs to be connecting with their own and we can direct them to interact with balance well behaved dogs especially when they are young.
every dog I worked with benefitted from interaction with good stable dogs and you can see the difference in very short time.
I think its harder in the beginning to let your dog off-lead its scary but so rewarding for me and for her.


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

Whiteshadow said:


> my girl does not play with every other dog and her focus is on me.she is very selective nowadays and sometimes dont play with other dogs for days but its joy to watch when she find a good match.I do think that exposing her to other dogs (and different people,traffic, noices etc) build her confidence and shaped her personality not without lessons we learned. I do believe its good for dogs to be connecting with their own and we can direct them to interact with balance well behaved dogs especially when they are young.
> every dog I worked with benefitted from interaction with good stable dogs and you can see the difference in very short time.
> I think its harder in the beginning to let your dog off-lead its scary but so rewarding for me and for her.


There is exposing to other dogs....which most dog owners do...this doesn't need to meet and greet a dog but seeing another dog from a far...and is usually far more beneficial. Dogs can still smell the other dog and get used to being in the same area.

Am sure many multi dog owners will tell you it's in the home where the majority of play occurs...walks are usually for the dogs to be confident independent beings with their own focus being on their owners, which is how it should be!


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

Whiteshadow said:


> my girl does not play with every other dog and her focus is on me.she is very selective nowadays and sometimes dont play with other dogs for days but its joy to watch when she find a good match.I do think that exposing her to other dogs (and different people,traffic, noices etc) build her confidence and shaped her personality not without lessons we learned. I do believe its good for dogs to be connecting with their own and we can direct them to interact with balance well behaved dogs especially when they are young.
> every dog I worked with benefitted from interaction with good stable dogs and you can see the difference in very short time.
> I think its harder in the beginning to let your dog off-lead its scary but so rewarding for me and for her.


So presumably, you decide which other dogs are a 'good match' and then "direct your dog to interact", or does she make her own decision about that by approaching other dogs at will until she finds one she likes?



Whiteshadow said:


> I do think that exposing her to other dogs (and different people,traffic, noices etc) build her confidence and shaped her


I believe most of us know all about socialising a young pup.


----------



## Guest (Nov 26, 2017)

@Sweety she decides if she want any interaction at all with the other (interested )dog If Idont like it I tell her to leave it.
I did direct her when she was growing up.



ShibaPup said:


> I agree - Lily is always on lead in public, she's never played with any other dog but she's happy - loves her walks


I dont want my girl to interact with every dog but The NEVER sounds very extreme to me so I asked @ShibaPup about it and if you are anywhre near London would love to introduce our girls .


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

Whiteshadow said:


> I did direct her when she was growing up


Interesting.

How did you 'direct' her to interact with another dog?


----------



## Guest (Nov 26, 2017)

Sweety said:


> Interesting.
> 
> How did you 'direct' her to interact with another dog?


Ha. I meant to avoid dogs I cant make any dog play if not interested


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

Whiteshadow said:


> Ha. I meant to avoid dogs I cant make any dog play if not interested


Depends how young a dog is... extremely young dogs have no social skills and often think any dog is fair game. Which is why you have had to tell your dog to 'leave' other dogs...I don't think @ShibaPup has this problem with Lily who she's worked hard to be dog neutral and owner focused.


----------



## Aahlly (Sep 12, 2014)

I don't like mine playing with other dogs and TBH it's for the exact reason of what happened to this poor, poor little beagle  I'm in no way blaming the dog walker for what happened, but stories like this do make me just a little paranoid. I just do not trust other dogs and owners.

All of mine but particularly Ghost and Roxy are completely bombproof. They will tolerate an incredible amount of shenanigans from off leash dogs intruding into their space and kids all over the place, but I just don't want to put them in a position where they could be at risk or where they feel they need to get defensive. Their little lives are too short for them to be stressed out by a situation that is completely avoidable. I walk them off lead frequently but I've worked hard to ensure that they know they don't approach strange dogs. It doesn't mean they're unfriendly or not safe or lack interaction. It just means that I am in control of the situation and I can keep them safe with minimal unknowns. Ghost has a friend who is a greyhound who is one of the few dogs I am happy for him to play with without worrying. I see him and his owner around quite a lot and I know for a fact the dog is safe and his energy level matches Ghost. They are the opposite end of the scale, Ghost is very tiny and the greyhound is very tall but they play nicely and listen to each other so I trust this dog. But a random dog? No way. It's not necessary or beneficial for their wellbeing to allow them to approach randoms so we don't do it.


----------



## Dogloverlou (Dec 8, 2013)

Must admit I do like seeing dogs interact and run around together if well suited. But unless you know the owners well it's risky allowing your dog to just run & play with any old dogs. Most 'average joe' type owners just do not see the signals of their dog being uncomfortable, anxious etc and put their and your dog in avoidable situations.

I created a bit of a monster with that attitude sadly. Ty would run up to any dog we saw because I'd previously allowed it. Didn't matter whether the dog was friendly or not...I couldn't get him back until he'd greeted the other dog. Back then I was not aware of all the cons surrounding his behaviour and was just of the opinion it was socialisation. Old habits die hard though and to this day he'd leg it given half a chance so when around dogs now he's on lead.

However, getting the balance right I find really difficult. I practised a lot more avoidance & trained for Cash to ignore other dogs etc. However in turn it's made him IMO inexperienced at reading other dogs and he's extremely bolshy if given half a chance to play/interact with other dogs. The only chances he had of that was when meeting hanwombat's lot, but in the end he became to much for those meetings too so now Ty gets to enjoy those walks instead.

I think it's nice to meet with like minded people whom you trust and know are equally as responsible as you, and more importantly the dogs get on! But I'll never repeat the mistakes I made with Ty.


----------



## Nettles (Mar 24, 2011)

The entire point of this thread is the reason why I don’t allow Phoebe to approach and “play” with random dogs. Not that she wants to anyway, she still wants to play with me even when she’s with a dog I know and allow her to play with. I don’t know if the next dog she approaches is going to be friendly or if it’s going to be a maniac who’s going to rip her limb from limb like the poor Beagle, so I’d just rather not take that chance. It’s not as if Joe Public has given me much confidence in being able to read their own dog either!


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

But I think at times the whole 'you must socialise' has created a problem with dogs who have just been allowed to run over to other dogs & play,etc with no control from their owners has created dogs who see every other dog as a playmate.I also think some people are lazy & think by their dog running round causing chaos tires him/her out so they don;t have to do much some people have a sense of entitlement & feel their dog can do what s/he like as they are only 'being friendly'.

When I got my younger GSD I wanted him to be focussed on me & nothing else, so that's what I have got. In some ways he is too focussed (f that makes sense) so I then had to train him that on a walk he doesn't have to be doing something with me all the time, but this also means that he has zero interest on other dogs. we walks with friends & their dogs occasionally & the dogs interact to a degree but rent that fussed with each other.

I think that socialisation is over rated at times,I think we often don't understand how to do this effectively or watch & really see how our dogs are managing in some situations so at times create problems for some dogs & allow others to practise bad behaviour


----------



## EmCHammer (Dec 28, 2009)

Everyone must walk in some pretty bad dog walking areas and have pretty low opinion of all other dog walkers if their dogs are never allowed to or have never played with other dogs. 

Yes there is worse than being on lead but mine would never be on lead by choice. They enjoy interacting with other dogs when they want to which does not always include playing infact more times there is no play.. sometimes they just like a sniff and a move on sometimes they ignore other dogs. They are not allowed to run amok and if I see someone we are not sure of they go on the lead . They enjoy interacting with their own kind on their terms if they want to.

When my poorly boy had to be on lead it was miserable for us all .. now if he wants to stop an sniff he can at leisure if he wants to interact with anyone suitable he can.

We have good friends they play with and know well sometimes they like meeting new dogs . My boy met an older dog the other day and they took a real shine to eachother . If play is wrong as mine can be full on its stope or not allowed to get started... they are not allowed to charge around being too much for other dogs.

Surely there is a middle ground between never being allowed to meet and greet and play or nor play or potter about with their own kind if they well rounded dogs and those who have under socialised full on or aggressive dogs charging about everywhere. Interactions with other dogs don' have to involve play.

There is the worry of incidents like this but surely they are few and far between. Most people we meet on out walks are pretty sensible. If a dog is never allowed to interact with a dog how is it taught to cope if it meets a real dog in person?


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

EmCHammer said:


> Everyone must walk in some pretty bad dog walking areas and have pretty low opinion of all other dog walkers if their dogs are never allowed to or have never played with other dogs.


Some of that depends on the breed or type of dog. Doesn't matter whose at "fault" if you have a dog that looks a certain way. Your dog will be blamed for anything. Knowing that wouldn't you play on the safe side?


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

I really don't like how this thread is turning into essentially telling people they are wrong for not allowing their dog to interact with strange dogs...it isn't really anyone's business if someone decides to keep their dog on leash and dogs don't need to interact with strange dogs to work out how to behave.

Maybe if more people kept their dogs on leash then we would have less headlines about dogs...
My dog doesn't miss out by not meeting other dogs on our walks, in fact my dog does more than most around here...the fact is that most of the general public do not understand their dogs behaviour so why should we run the risk of something kicking off just to appease others!


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

EmCHammer said:


> Everyone must walk in some pretty bad dog walking areas and have pretty low opinion of all other dog walkers if their dogs are never allowed to or have never played with other dogs.
> 
> Yes there is worse than being on lead but mine would never be on lead by choice. They enjoy interacting with other dogs when they want to which does not always include playing infact more times there is no play.. sometimes they just like a sniff and a move on sometimes they ignore other dogs. They are not allowed to run amok and if I see someone we are not sure of they go on the lead . They enjoy interacting with their own kind on their terms if they want to.
> 
> ...


But I suppose it depends on the dog,the owner, etc & as @Goblin says some breeds will always be blamed if something does happen even if it's a minor altercation or warning. Even when my older GSD was attacked by a small dog (it flew off a boat we were walking past with no warning) she was blamed for retaliating ... 

As my older dog can be reactive & she's now got arthritis so dogs bothering her cause her even more worry. She is allowed to play with or interact with dogs I know as I am familiar with their personalities & the dogs are always under control/ Also she can be a bully at times & it is not fair on less confident dogs to have to deal with her behaviour.

With my young dog then the same, he interacts with dogs I know but there is no way he is allowed to interact with unknown dogs, as usually we are training when out around other people (our walks are in the countryside where we don;t meet anyone else) & tbh he really isn't interested at all. Makes me laugh as I have been told by other people to let him [play with their dogs & 'have some fun' when he is having the best fun training with me, we interact & enjoy ourselves much more than most people we see but because he chooses to stay with me & ignore other dogs apparently he must be miserable


----------



## EmCHammer (Dec 28, 2009)

My dogs def look a certain way. And I want them to be ambassadors for the type of dogs they are so I have done my best to socialise them around people and dogs from a young age so they can be generally tusted around other dogs. They are dogs and not machines so they might tell off an unruly dog (but they wouldn' bite it or haven't Ever done so far) They have had an odd handbags scuffle if a dog has started on them. We live in an area where there are loads of dog walkers and we get on fine with most people. In the 4 years of owning them they haven't ever attacked a dog or bit a child but I do monitor interactions when we meet other dogs as I know they don't. Like to interact with certain other types of dog historically). On the times we have had any issues it's been few and far between (like me telling an owner my boy doesn't play ball nicely when we were having a nice interaction with some dogs. Man Said it will be fine and chucked the ball. Consequently when 4 dogs got to the ball at the same time his dog got roared at by mine and pinned down. His wife gave him a proper telling off). 
I understand some dogs need to be on leads due to recall issues or injury and I've had reactive dogs before and who like to keep themselves to themselves and one that has nipped people and not all dogs like interacting with other dogs. But I'm not restricting the way we walk or keeping mine on lead because of the way my dogs look. They find being off lead enriching and have been socialised to know how to behave most of the time off lead. 

I've no problem with reactive dogs I've had one and most owners are vigilant. Most of the ones we meet are well managed but if worse came to worse wouldnt
Kill another dog (i think) . If a dog is that aggressive I would be very fearful of walking in the same park as it or owning such a dog myself


----------



## ShibaPup (Mar 22, 2017)

Never mind.

Nothing wrong with keeping a dog on lead.

Nothing wrong with letting a dog off lead.

As long as in both circumstances - you can keep your dog under-control and not bothering anyone else.


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

StormyThai said:


> I really don't like how this thread is turning into essentially telling people they are wrong for not allowing their dog to interact with strange dogs...it isn't really anyone's business if someone decides to keep their dog on leash and dogs don't need to interact with strange dogs to work out how to behave.
> 
> Maybe if more people kept their dogs on leash then we would have less headlines about dogs...
> My dog doesn't miss out by not meeting other dogs on our walks, in fact my dog does more than most around here...the fact is that most of the general public do not understand their dogs behaviour so why should we run the risk of something kicking off just to appease others!


If you want to keep your dog on the lead that is up to you but I think you are actually telling people to keep their off lead dogs on the lead - why is that any different. Most dogs are off lead and most dog walkers are happy with this. There are probably just as many on lead dogs that cause a problem by lunging and snarling and barking at other dogs as there are off lead dogs that cause a problem by giving unwanted attention to other dogs. If there are people who are never going to let their dogs off the lead just in case they run into the dog in a million that is going to cause damage it is rather sad. Do you do the same with children and never let them play with other children or go out anywhere just in case they meet the child in a million that will stab them or an adult that will do them harm. We have to be sensible and allow our dogs and children to lead a normal life.


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

My dog is an ambassador for his breed...he is known extremely well around here and is allowed places most dogs aren't because of how well behaved he is...I did not have to let him meet and greet strangers to achieve this - quite the opposite in fact 
Keeping a dog on leash isn't always about reactivity or injury or anything beyond the owner wants to keep control - that should be congratulated, but instead we get the usual "dogs aren't happy unless they are off leash running around"- Sorry but that is hogwash IMHO


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

Blitz said:


> but I think you are actually telling people to keep their off lead dogs on the lead


I'm sorry but where did I say that?


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

StormyThai said:


> I'm sorry but where did I say that?


Here - Maybe if more people kept their dogs on leash then we would have less headlines about dogs...


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

Incidentally my dogs very seldom play with other dogs but it is lovely to see when they meet up with a dog that is in the mood for playing when they are in the mood for playing. They do sniff and greet other dogs when we are at the holiday cottage and are walking in dog populated areas and when it is obvious the other owner is happy for it to happen. Unless it is very busy (usually avoid busy times and go to the woods) they are off the lead for all off road walks as have all my dogs been over 50 years of dog ownership. Toffee is the first dog I have had that is too social and has to be controlled to stop her greeting people and dogs - it is a pain but still in my opinion better to be off the lead even though it would be much easier for me if she was on the lead as I would not have to be so vigilant.


----------



## ShibaPup (Mar 22, 2017)

Blitz said:


> Here - Maybe if more people kept their dogs on leash then we would have less headlines about dogs...


That's not telling anyone to keep their dog on a lead.


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

That isn't telling people to keep their off leash dogs on the leash that is just saying that maybe if more people actually controlled their dogs (on or off leash) then we wouldn't have these headlines - having dogs on or off leash isn't the issue, the issue is that the majority don't/won't control their dogs and wouldn't know a bully if it jumped up in their face...

My dog is kept on leash when I choose that it is appropriate - no one needs to feel sad for him, and he is not missing out on being a dog!
Not all dogs want or need to meet and greet strangers, they just don't care...


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

I'd happily welcome more dog restrictions (as in dogs on leads) in places. I have to avoid certain places due to dogs that are off lead and out of control. There is a lovely park that then goes onto the Downs in the neighbouring town 10 minutes from me, but between dog walkers sitting gossiping in the cafe ignoring their loose dogs, people ignoring their dogs and leaving their shit, and professional dog walkers who rock up with a van full and set them loose it's a no-go area. People on Facebook are constantly complaining about the shit, out of control dogs etc, and recently a little boy was pulled off his bike and bitten by a loose dog.....

So I'd rather see dogs on leads in certain places than blanket bans any day!


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

StormyThai said:


> My dog is kept on leash when I choose that it is appropriate - no one needs to feel sad for him, and he is not missing out on being a dog!
> Not all dogs want or need to meet and greet strangers, they just don't care...


Years ago I met an elderly couple with two labs, their dogs ran over to us Roxy wasn't fussed as she was having a swim. The couple then commented on her long line which was on the ground whilst she was swimming & said how sad for her to be stuck on 'that awful thing' when she should be running free (she was swimming freely but that didn't count for some reason  ) ...they didn't believe in leads at all apparently!

But they then told me how they could only be out with their dogs for 15-20 mins as the dogs then started to run off chasing things, I did point out that Roxy was on her long line because there were deer everywhere, we could even see a small group from where we were standing & as the A10 wasn't that far away I wasn't taking any chances, ... they laughed & said dogs will be dogs .... & all that rubbish so I smiled & said nothing.

A few weeks later I saw them again .... with one dog ... the other dog had been run over on the A10 chasing deer  ... such an awful thing to have happened yet still their other dog was off lead, they had no lead with them but apparently as he had seen his sister get run over that would deter him from chasing ...... I honestly didn't know what to say to that ridiculous theory.


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

And I also don't get this reluctance to ever have a dog on a lead, or that having it on a lead means you can't have a decent walk and the dog is missing out somehow. I definitely used to be of that mindset that a dog needs 'x' amount of free running per day, and that if it's on a lead it's not a "proper" walk. In fact if they had to spend too much time on the lead for whatever reason I'd actually get pissed off - how DARE that farmer move his/her livestock there?! how dare they hold some event in the place where I walk!? how dare there be too many other people/dogs/whatever around so that I can't let my dogs off?! .......why? probably because I was a lazy cow, and it's much easier to have a dog off the lead than keep it on.

Granted I do much prefer seeing my dog(s) off lead, but I also have no problem in keeping them on the lead when/where necessary, which is a lot of the time here due to livestock. There are lots of options to give a dog freedom while still keeping it on a lead.


----------



## Sarahliz100 (Jan 5, 2014)

Clearly the initial story is horrific and terrible and extreme. Definitely not an appropriate reaction from the attacking dogs. From a point of view of the should all dogs be on lead discussion:

I think whether your dog is on or off lead doesn’t matter too much as long as you respect those around you. Where I live offlead greetings are pretty standard. Usually just a quick sniff and move on. From experience with my own anxious dog I know that stopping interaction with other dogs is almost impossible without walking at stupid o’clock. 

From an anecdotal perspective with my experience of one anxious dog I’ve found that trying to prevent greetings means that on the inevitable occasions a dog rushes up to him my dog doesn’t know how to cope. Allowing many low key greetings teaches him it’s no big deal and means that the odd time a dog is too boisterous for him he can shake it off because he’s had so many uneventful encounters rather than going into “all dogs are scary” mode.

Personally I find I do pretty well at reading the situation and if the other dog is offlead and owner looking relaxed I let the greeting happen with minimal fuss “say hello, good lad, let’s go” (brief polite sniff in passing and keep moving). He does have decent recall so if anything suggests a meeting isn’t a good idea (other dog onlead, other owner looking tense, other dog looking overly exuberant or threatening) he gets popped on lead. 

My dog doesn’t want to play, he just wants a quick sniff (or sometimes just to scoot on past without contact) and will come away very quickly. If I had a dog who didn’t come away or tended to try to play boisterously with other dogs regardless of whether they are interested I’d be keeping him onlead until I was happy the other dog was an appropriate match. 

If your dog copes better onlead than off - fine. If your dog is perfect offlead - great. If you do a mixture depending on situation - awesome. What isn’t ok is letting your dog ruin someone else’s day because you can’t or won’t control yours.


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

Cleo38 said:


> Years ago I met an elderly couple with two labs, their dogs ran over to us Roxy wasn't fussed as she was having a swim. The couple then commented on her long line which was on the ground whilst she was swimming & said how sad for her to be stuck on 'that awful thing' when she should be running free (she was swimming freely but that didn't count for some reason  ) ...they didn't believe in leads at all apparently!
> 
> But they then told me how they could only be out with their dogs for 15-20 mins as the dogs then started to run off chasing things, I did point out that Roxy was on her long line because there were deer everywhere, we could even see a small group from where we were standing & as the A10 wasn't that far away I wasn't taking any chances, ... they laughed & said dogs will be dogs .... & all that rubbish so I smiled & said nothing.
> 
> A few weeks later I saw them again .... with one dog ... the other dog had been run over on the A10 chasing deer  ... such an awful thing to have happened yet still their other dog was off lead, they had no lead with them but apparently as he had seen his sister get run over that would deter him from chasing ...... I honestly didn't know what to say to that ridiculous theory.


Doesn't surprise me at all! I knew of a Lab that broke it's leg after being hit by a car as the owner walked it off the lead along the pavement, they still continued to walk it off the lead next to roads afterwards!


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

ShibaPup said:


> That's not telling anyone to keep their dog on a lead.


Yes it is , just as much as anyone has said that dogs should be off lead.

There will obviously always be disagreement on this. I think it is very sad that some dogs are not given freedom to run around and be dogs. That has nothing to do with meeting other dogs by the way. They can run around where there are no other dogs. I will always think that. Some dogs have to be on the lead because of temperament or health problems but why keep the average pet dog on the lead. Thank goodness it is rare to see dogs on the lead round here - or out of control for that matter but there are a fair few on the lead near the holiday cottage mostly with owners that will stop and encourage their dog to greet other dogs so it is purely that they are scared that they lack control. Most of the dogs I have owned have had zero interest in other dogs and people and are totally focused on me but they can still range around and have a lot of fun with each other and enjoy their freedom. I do find it very hard having a nutter that has to be kept under control but I would not keep her on the lead all the time. My past dogs many years ago were always walked in parks and by the river etc and if another dog was out of control round them I just dropped them till the owner caught the dog, no biggy. There did not seem to be aggressive dogs around back then, people had appropriate breeds for where they lived and the dogs had more freedom so did not develop the same problems. My dogs that I have had on the farm have had little socialisation yet have been able to come on holiday with us and be walked in busy dog areas off lead with no problem. I think there is too much reading and thinking going on instead of relaxing and enjoying


----------



## Nettles (Mar 24, 2011)

I have absolutely no objections to people having their dogs off lead whatsoever. Phoebe is very, very rarely on lead. But if someone can’t stop their dog from approaching me or my dog (and I don’t mean a passing sniff) then it’s not under sufficient control and should be on lead.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse (Feb 9, 2014)

@Blitz it is nice to see you acknowledge that dogs might have to be kept on a lead for all sorts of different reasons not just temperament but my objection to your comments remains your suggestion that dogs who are lead walked somehow lead a miserable life. That is unfair to those of us who take our responsibilities to our dogs and to others seriously and work hard to make sure our dogs are still well exercised and stimulated and happy.


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

StormyThai said:


> I really don't like how this thread is turning into essentially telling people they are wrong for not allowing their dog to interact with strange dogs...it isn't really anyone's business if someone decides to keep their dog on leash and dogs don't need to interact with strange dogs to work out how to behave.
> 
> Maybe if more people kept their dogs on leash then we would have less headlines about dogs...
> My dog doesn't miss out by not meeting other dogs on our walks, in fact my dog does more than most around here...the fact is that most of the general public do not understand their dogs behaviour so why should we run the risk of something kicking off just to appease others!


Actually, I think one of the biggest problems we have is that many dog owners and walker now expect dogs to play. I've had my dogs called 'grumpy' because they don't want to join in! It doesn't bother me (or my dogs) but it is worrying that more and more people think that dogs playing is so important. I also think that dog walkers that walk large groups are also part of this problem.


----------



## ShibaPup (Mar 22, 2017)

Blitz said:


> Yes it is , just as much as anyone has said that dogs should be off lead.
> 
> There will obviously always be disagreement on this. I think it is very sad that some dogs are not given freedom to run around and be dogs. That has nothing to do with meeting other dogs by the way. They can run around where there are no other dogs. I will always think that. Some dogs have to be on the lead because of temperament or health problems but why keep the average pet dog on the lead. Thank goodness it is rare to see dogs on the lead round here - or out of control for that matter but there are a fair few on the lead near the holiday cottage mostly with owners that will stop and encourage their dog to greet other dogs so it is purely that they are scared that they lack control. Most of the dogs I have owned have had zero interest in other dogs and people and are totally focused on me but they can still range around and have a lot of fun with each other and enjoy their freedom. I do find it very hard having a nutter that has to be kept under control but I would not keep her on the lead all the time. My past dogs many years ago were always walked in parks and by the river etc and if another dog was out of control round them I just dropped them till the owner caught the dog, no biggy. There did not seem to be aggressive dogs around back then, people had appropriate breeds for where they lived and the dogs had more freedom so did not develop the same problems. My dogs that I have had on the farm have had little socialisation yet have been able to come on holiday with us and be walked in busy dog areas off lead with no problem. I think there is too much reading and thinking going on instead of relaxing and enjoying


I'm sorry people think it is very sad or that dogs have a miserable life or can't be dogs - purely because she's on lead...

Well done for having beautifully behaved dogs that are focused on you - mine isn't all the time, she wouldn't have gave it a second thought to bugger off after a scent or to go for a fuss from a stranger. I have had to work damn hard to get to where I have with Lily so far and I'm still working on it. 
Off lead she would get to practice all those behaviours I don't want and I couldn't stop her. There is no way Lily would stay in a down while an out of control dog ran rings round her - I'd simply leave with Lily.
People live in different areas... I live in a town, lots of people, lots of kids, lots of dogs, lots of cats, lots of cars, buses, lorries with only play fields and pavements for walks, for a 2 hour walk each way I could take her to a small woodland but we're hours from any countryside. Lily runs off a play field - she would end up running straight out onto a main road.

I do my very best to keep Lily safe, happy, provide her with an enriching life, and make sure she isn't a bother to anyone.

She's happy and content, she's confident, loves everyone, ignores dogs, ignores cats and isn't bothered by anything but shiny floors and her own reflection.


----------



## Dr Pepper (Jan 17, 2017)

The thing with dogs on a lead is you don’t always see the full picture. I’ve had a couple of people tell me I’m being unkind by always having the dogs on a lead, which is simply their perception. Admittedly some dogs never go off the lead and that can be for a number of reasons. Many will go off the lead only when I’m as sure as I can be there are no other dogs/people about, so if I’m doing my job right these dogs are perceived to always be on the lead. The only dogs that will be off the lead when I meet people are the few I can be 99.9% sure won’t run up to any one, will friendly play if required and most importantly is always within a few feet of me should things go queer. Every single dog will always go on a lead if we meet others on a lead. So just because you see dogs that are “always” on a lead doesn’t mean they actually are.

What really gets my back up are the people who let their dogs run up to a dog on a lead and then say “it’s ok they only want to play”, well they might do but mine might be on a lead because they want a fight or are very nervous, either way keep your dogs away for their own safety as well as ours.


----------



## Siskin (Nov 13, 2012)

I've had dogs that have been easy going friendly dogs who are off the lead most of their walk through to bog off dog and one who didn't want to meet anybody or anything and were kept on lead. The mainly on lead dogs were let off on those occasions where they were in a safe confined area and couldn't vanish or where I could see well enough ahead to see that there was nothing about for grumpy dog to go have a bark at. So, in my case it largely depends on the dog whether they are on or off a lead.
Can't say I've had anybody tell my I'm being cruel to have them on a lead although have had several ask me why Isla is on a lead as she is so obviously friendly. As she can be over friendly and I'm concerned that she might squash their little dog or frighten their nervous dog or accidentally hurt their elderly/injured dog then she's safer on a lead in those circumstances. I've become fairly adept at reading people and their dogs at a distance and decide whether to lead her up or not, but always follow the unwritten rule of leashing her if their dog is on a lead.


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

rottiepointerhouse said:


> @Blitz it is nice to see you acknowledge that dogs might have to be kept on a lead for all sorts of different reasons not just temperament but my objection to your comments remains your suggestion that dogs who are lead walked somehow lead a miserable life. That is unfair to those of us who take our responsibilities to our dogs and to others seriously and work hard to make sure our dogs are still well exercised and stimulated and happy.


The trouble is though that a lot of on lead dogs are not stimulated and happy. They are either trotting along beside their owner ignoring everything and completely unstimulated or lunging around trying to stimulate themselves. They go for their 15 minute or 30 minute walk and are then in the house all day doing nothing. Hence a lot of complaints about bored dogs.



ShibaPup said:


> I'm sorry people think it is very sad or that dogs have a miserable life or can't be dogs - purely because she's on lead...
> 
> Well done for having beautifully behaved dogs that are focused on you - mine isn't all the time, she wouldn't have gave it a second thought to bugger off after a scent or to go for a fuss from a stranger. I have had to work damn hard to get to where I have with Lily so far and I'm still working on it.
> Off lead she would get to practice all those behaviours I don't want and I couldn't stop her. There is no way Lily would stay in a down while an out of control dog ran rings round her - I'd simply leave with Lily.
> ...


As I said Toffee is a nutter, she is not beautifully behaved and she is hard work and as we live in a remote area where she seldom meets dogs it is an almost impossible job and a lot of hard work when we are away in doggy areas. When I lived somewhere where my dogs were walked in parks etc they were collies and shelties who had a lot of training and competed in obedience. They were walked 3 or 4 times a day from puppies and were able to do a reliable down and stay as I felt it was necessary to safe walking. No way would current dogs do that as they have not needed to be trained to.

Candy doesnt like her reflection in water either - stupid dogs.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

Blitz said:


> The trouble is though that a lot of on lead dogs are not stimulated and happy. They are either trotting along beside their owner ignoring everything and completely unstimulated or lunging around trying to stimulate themselves. They go for their 15 minute or 30 minute walk and are then in the house all day doing nothing. Hence a lot of complaints about bored dogs.
> 
> As I said Toffee is a nutter, she is not beautifully behaved and she is hard work and as we live in a remote area where she seldom meets dogs it is an almost impossible job and a lot of hard work when we are away in doggy areas. When I lived somewhere where my dogs were walked in parks etc they were collies and shelties who had a lot of training and competed in obedience. They were walked 3 or 4 times a day from puppies and were able to do a reliable down and stay as I felt it was necessary to safe walking. No way would current dogs do that as they have not needed to be trained to.
> 
> Candy doesnt like her reflection in water either - stupid dogs.


But then you could argue the same with off lead dogs.The dogs I spoke of t the local leisure centre got no stimulation from their owners, instead they were allowed to run riot & just practice bad behaviour, hyping each other up ... to me that is not healthy or beneficial either.

For me it's more about meeting the needs of the dog & that might be slightly different for everyone. With my young GSD who is offlead nearly all the time he could run about all day & not get tired yet as we are re-thinking our HW training we are having more more technical training sessions. I am trying to get him to think & hold his position statically & in motion, we are working on much more precision now (we have a LONG way to go still!) & a few sessions of these each day & he is knackered, for him it is very challenging & demanding even though he is a very fit, high drive dog.

I agree that physical exercise is very important but I do think it needs to be the right sort, my older GSD doesn't get the hours she used to due to her arthritis but still gets over an hour each day coupled with tracking or scentwork activities. My young WL also doesn't get hours of walking but we do alot of training for our sport which he loves, if he were just allowed to run around off lead doing what he wanted he would be a nightmare.


----------



## Dogloverlou (Dec 8, 2013)

Sarahliz100 said:


> Clearly the initial story is horrific and terrible and extreme. Definitely not an appropriate reaction from the attacking dogs. From a point of view of the should all dogs be on lead discussion:
> 
> I think whether your dog is on or off lead doesn't matter too much as long as you respect those around you. Where I live offlead greetings are pretty standard. Usually just a quick sniff and move on. From experience with my own anxious dog I know that stopping interaction with other dogs is almost impossible without walking at stupid o'clock.
> 
> ...


That pretty much sums up my views on the subject too.


----------



## rottiepointerhouse (Feb 9, 2014)

@Blitz

*Some* on lead dogs are not stimulated and happy but I also see plenty of off lead dogs not stimulated and happy, trotting along beside their owner who is ignoring them and busy checking their phone or listening to music, they often carry on walking when their dog is struck the other side of a group of dogs because they haven't noticed. I would no more accuse every person who has their dog off lead of understimulating their dogs than you should accuse those of us with on lead dogs of understimulating ours. It is a gross generalisation to do so. My on lead pointer goes for 60 - 90 minute walks most days, a bit shorter in the winter when the weather is bad as he hates the wet, we make sure to take him to areas where there are plenty of exciting smells for him so forests, heathland and out on the moors, he has never been taken for a quick 15 or 30 minute walk with no stimulation and he doesn't lunge around or cause a moments upset to anyone else. Please be aware of how hurtful your words are when you say dogs on lead have a miserable life.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

rottiepointerhouse said:


> @Blitz
> 
> *Some* on lead dogs are not stimulated and happy but I also see plenty of off lead dogs not stimulated and happy, trotting along beside their owner who is ignoring them and busy checking their phone or listening to music, they often carry on walking when their dog is struck the other side of a group of dogs because they haven't noticed. I would no more accuse every person who has their dog off lead of understimulating their dogs than you should accuse those of us with on lead dogs of understimulating ours. It is a gross generalisation to do so. My on lead pointer goes for 60 - 90 minute walks most days, a bit shorter in the winter when the weather is bad as he hates the wet, we make sure to take him to areas where there are plenty of exciting smells for him so forests, heathland and out on the moors, he has never been taken for a quick 15 or 30 minute walk with no stimulation and he doesn't lunge around or cause a moments upset to anyone else. Please be aware of how hurtful your words are when you say dogs on lead have a miserable life.


I agree .... I think there are so many variations between dogs & owners that it is impossible to make blanket statements. But really if we are happy with our decisions & feel our dogs are aswell then it doesn't really matter what anyone else thinks. Everyone will have opinions & we can either let it bother us or just be happy with our decisions


----------



## Guest (Nov 27, 2017)

Wow this thread has had some twists and turns  

For the record, I don't think a leash would have averted this tragedy. There was a famous case in 2001 in San Francisco of a woman who was killed by two presa canarios who were on leash at the time. The owner could not hold them back and they cornered her in the elevator of her apartment building and killed her. Horrific. And yup, I'm going to say it. Not pet dogs. And most definitely not dogs who needed to be living in an apartment. Tragic. 

Personally I think more dogs should be ON leash since their owners have no control. Is it ideal? Nope. I'd much rather a dog have off-leash time, I think it's good for them, but I'd much rather a dog be on leash and safe. 

Saying that, I would not enjoy having a dog who could never be off leash. Even with breeds not known for off leash reliability, I would set up opportunities for off leash time like renting a field or as happens often here in the US, simply having plenty of good fencing in a large yard. It's not at all unusual to have an acre of yard that is fully fenced. Plenty of US dogs are never off leash outside their home simply because of leash laws. 
Though it's interesting to me how common it is for American dogs to have absolutely zero recall. Like not even a hint of it. I can't tell you how many people are fascinated that mine don't bomb off the second I take their leash off. Or even more amazing, come right back when I call them. It has become a rarity for dogs to be used to being off leash like mine and that is sad to me. 

Bates comes with us pretty much everywhere these days, and the other day, OH took him to go pick up a kid from something. He forgot a leash! But it was a total non issue. It really would drive me crazy to have to be vigilant all the time, worried about your dog running off.


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

labradrk said:


> I'd happily welcome more dog restrictions (as in dogs on leads) in places. I have to avoid certain places due to dogs that are off lead and out of control. There is a lovely park that then goes onto the Downs in the neighbouring town 10 minutes from me, but between dog walkers sitting gossiping in the cafe ignoring their loose dogs, people ignoring their dogs and leaving their shit, and professional dog walkers who rock up with a van full and set them loose it's a no-go area. People on Facebook are constantly complaining about the shit, out of control dogs etc, and recently a little boy was pulled off his bike and bitten by a loose dog.....
> 
> So I'd rather see dogs on leads in certain places than blanket bans any day!


I agree, but people need to complain to their councils. Most councils are putting in place PSPOs which include restrictions that used to be covered by dog control orders (and more) but there are very active dog walker groups that are actively campaigning against it. If there is no support for these moves, they will not happen.


Dr Pepper said:


> The thing with dogs on a lead is you don't always see the full picture. I've had a couple of people tell me I'm being unkind by always having the dogs on a lead, which is simply their perception. Admittedly some dogs never go off the lead and that can be for a number of reasons. Many will go off the lead only when I'm as sure as I can be there are no other dogs/people about, so if I'm doing my job right these dogs are perceived to always be on the lead. The only dogs that will be off the lead when I meet people are the few I can be 99.9% sure won't run up to any one, will friendly play if required and most importantly is always within a few feet of me should things go queer. Every single dog will always go on a lead if we meet others on a lead. So just because you see dogs that are "always" on a lead doesn't mean they actually are.
> 
> What really gets my back up are the people who let their dogs run up to a dog on a lead and then say "it's ok they only want to play", well they might do but mine might be on a lead because they want a fight or are very nervous, either way keep your dogs away for their own safety as well as ours.


I wouldn't take too much notice of what people say about being unkind - they are usually ignorant although will often claim to be experts having owned dogs all their lives! I was one told by a dog walker that I was cruel to my dogs because I was training them, they should really be free like wolves........!!! I did comment that they enjoyed doing that much more than playing with the dogs she was walking, which were jumping all over mine who were eagerly waiting for their next retrieve!


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

rottiepointerhouse said:


> @Blitz
> 
> *Some* on lead dogs are not stimulated and happy but I also see plenty of off lead dogs not stimulated and happy, trotting along beside their owner who is ignoring them and busy checking their phone or listening to music, they often carry on walking when their dog is struck the other side of a group of dogs because they haven't noticed. I would no more accuse every person who has their dog off lead of understimulating their dogs than you should accuse those of us with on lead dogs of understimulating ours. It is a gross generalisation to do so. My on lead pointer goes for 60 - 90 minute walks most days, a bit shorter in the winter when the weather is bad as he hates the wet, we make sure to take him to areas where there are plenty of exciting smells for him so forests, heathland and out on the moors, he has never been taken for a quick 15 or 30 minute walk with no stimulation and he doesn't lunge around or cause a moments upset to anyone else. Please be aware of how hurtful your words are when you say dogs on lead have a miserable life.


I did not say every on lead dog was not stimulated. You constantly tell us on here that your dogs are stimulated so that is fine. I presume you must not feel 100 percent confident about that or you would not take offence at me saying that most on lead dogs are not stimulated. If you are happy your dogs are well stimulated and not missing out from being on lead all the time then surely there is nothing to worry about.


----------



## MiffyMoo (Sep 15, 2015)

Blitz said:


> I did not say every on lead dog was not stimulated. You constantly tell us on here that your dogs are stimulated so that is fine. I presume you must not feel 100 percent confident about that or you would not take offence at me saying that most on lead dogs are not stimulated. If you are happy your dogs are well stimulated and not missing out from being on lead all the time then surely there is nothing to worry about.


Not sure why you had to make your reply such a personal dig, but I know I certainly took umbrage at your proclamation as well


----------



## rottiepointerhouse (Feb 9, 2014)

Blitz said:


> I did not say every on lead dog was not stimulated. You constantly tell us on here that your dogs are stimulated so that is fine. I presume you must not feel 100 percent confident about that or you would not take offence at me saying that most on lead dogs are not stimulated. If you are happy your dogs are well stimulated and not missing out from being on lead all the time then surely there is nothing to worry about.


Thank you I am 100 % confident my dogs are stimulated and that I have nothing to worry about but I'm not the only one who is reading your words.


----------



## Guest (Nov 27, 2017)

rocco33 said:


> I agree, but people need to complain to their councils. Most councils are putting in place PSPOs which include restrictions that used to be covered by dog control orders (and more) but there are very active dog walker groups that are actively campaigning against it. If there is no support for these moves, they will not happen.
> 
> I wouldn't take too much notice of what people say about being unkind - they are usually ignorant although will often claim to be experts having owned dogs all their lives! I was one told by a dog walker that I was cruel to my dogs because I was training them, they should really be free like wolves........!!! I did comment that they enjoyed doing that much more than playing with the dogs she was walking, which were jumping all over mine who were eagerly waiting for their next retrieve!


I have had that line thrown at me more than once when I have been training Buddy.


----------



## sskmick (Feb 4, 2008)

I haven't opened the link nevertheless irrespective of breed the dogs should have been under control. I know many dog owners who have verbal control, no lead whether that is right or wrong, if the dog has good recall I don't have a problem with dogs off lead.

I have never heard of a bully kutta - there are four banned breeds that I am aware of and this isn't one of them, unless there are now five banned breeds. The dogs were clearly out of control and and the incident should be covered under the DDA, however I wouldn't be surprised if it doesn't. As I was told dogs fight that's what they do.

I feel for both owners but more so for the owner who lost his dog in such and horrific way (dog attacks at this level are horrific). The dog walker who caused the incident has to live with that for the rest of his/her life. This is a harsh statement to make but had the dogs been under strict control the incident may never have happened but the dog walker would be able to sleep nights knowing he/she did all they could to prevent the incident in the first place.

What I mean is that even if the dogs were on a short lead, there was nothing preventing the beagle going over to them (hypothetically speaking). 

Any dog attack is upsetting but for a life to be lost is devastating.


----------

