# Protection from Attack?



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

Following on from another thread about dogs being attacked by other dogs, its made me a little worried.

I have two dogs. One is a large breed and although great with people, he is aggressive to other dogs until he knows them. For this reason, he is not let off the lead NEVER! My other dog is just a joy to walk. She is obedient and friendly to all she meets. She hasnt got an aggressive bone in her and bounds up to all dogs to say 'hello'. I take them for an hour long walk over open fields every day and there are lots of dogs, especially staffies and so far no problem.

It has, however, got me thinking. What the hell would I do if one of my dogs was viciously attacked? I am wondering whether I should carry a tin of hair spray or something. Does anyone have any better ideas? 

And what exactly is the law on irresponsible owners who let their dangerous dogs off the lead? What are the consequences?


----------



## Guest (Jul 8, 2012)

I try to carry a slip collar and lead, spare, to fit or be strong enough to get on any aggressive or lost dog, from chi to newfie. I always carry 2 X 2 litre bottles of water and 2 ice cream containers for dogs to drink. One for mine, one for giving to someone who may have a dog needing it. They are always in the car. If an aggressive dog has hold of yours and won't let go, slip the lead under the neck of the dog, pull around the neck, and tighten like a tournaquet . You have to be really hard about it. Tighten and hold until the dog has HAD to let go. Get the attacked dog out of it's eyeline, preferably safely, behind a fence or in a car. If there are any pantyhose offered, they can be tied around the muzzle, then behind the neck.

If the dogs are the same size, you can try grabbing the back legs of the aggressor, and twisting them upwards, so that the dog will attempt to get a regrip. If one dog is very big, in comparison, I don't believe that would work.

I think hairspray etc, would be pretty useless. There is an urban myth going around, to aggressively stick your finger into the dogs anus, but this seems very ill advised. The dog will be beyond reaching and will likely turn on you. You have to force it to let go, then keep it under control, until the victim is beyond it's reach, and it is no longer in a rage beyond comprehending anything.

PS make sure the tournequet is at the top of the neck, not down near the shoulders.


----------



## Howl (Apr 10, 2012)

I don't know. When it happened to me I was so shocked at first I didn't react then I managed to get her to sit still behind me while I tried to stop the dog attacking and the owner reclaimed their dog.


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

Ang2 said:


> She hasnt got an aggressive bone in her and bounds up to all dogs to say 'hello'.
> 
> *I am assuming she does not bound up to all dogs which are on a lead?*
> 
> ...


Doglaw - SPECIALIST ADVICE ON DOG LAW

Define "dangerous".


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

In the event of a real attack then hairspray, water or anything like that is likely to be absolutely useless. I've strangled a dog off mine in the way househens mentions. Can be done with the dogs collar (if it's wearing one) but a slip lead is easier. Thankfully most of the "aggressive" dogs I've encountered seem to be simply bullies, lots of noise, posturing and shoving but no real intent to cause damage. Of course that can still cause other dogs psychological harm but I find these sort tend to back off fairly easily with the voice of doom.

If your dog is running up to other dogs without permission then I would put a stop to that though.


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

househens said:


> I try to carry a slip collar and lead, spare, to fit or be strong enough to get on any aggressive or lost dog, from chi to newfie. If an aggressive dog has hold of yours and won't let go, slip the lead under the neck of the dog, pull around the neck, and tighten like a tournaquet . You have to be really hard about it. Tighten and hold until the dog has HAD to let go. Get the attacked dog out of it's eyeline, preferably safely, behind a fence or in a car. If there are any pantyhose offered, they can be tied around the muzzle, then behind the neck.
> 
> *Putting your hands anywhere near a dog equipped with 42 lethal weapons which is actually attacking your dog (as opposed to mugging it and generally being a bully, which is ENTIRELY different) is stupidity of the highest order.
> 
> ...


Now the noose has morphed into a tourniquet?

I think I would pay to watch you to demonstrate this VERY dangerous advice with several dogs I could think of.


----------



## pearltheplank (Oct 2, 2010)

I may be reading this the wrong way but is the OP asking what you do if one is attacked, so what do you do with the other?

Years ago, I had two dogs, if the calmer one were to have been attacked then I couldn't have been able to break up the fight without the other diving in! What would you do then?


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

Sarah1983 said:


> In the event of a real attack then hairspray, water or anything like that is likely to be absolutely useless.
> 
> *ABsolutely*.
> 
> ...


Prevention is better than cure, so being observant can prevent the vast majority of such incidents.


----------



## SpringerHusky (Nov 6, 2008)

I carry a pet corrector as a deterrent for handbag fights.

Someone on here carries a small fire extinguisher, which would work well but would be quite heavy to lug around.


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

Firstly, can I just say that my little female dog is very friendly, but also smart. She will say 'hello' to other dogs and want to play BUT she will keep a few feet of distance to suss out any aggression and retreat if there is even the slightest sign. AND I am never far behind her and she will come to me when called without hesitation. I would assume that any other dog off the lead, should be safe and friendly as she is, or they should not be off the lead. She has made a few friends on our walks and its lovely to see them chasing around the meadows together playing tag. 

Pearltheplank - you made a very valid point! I hadnt thought of that. I wouldnt exactly have free hands to break up an attack on my dog. Its all very worrying and I have never encountered any problems or thought it could happen until reading these forums. I just presumed that everyone was as responsible with their dogs as I am. 

Smokeybear - If carrying hair spray constitutes carrying a dangerous weapon then most women are breaking the law! Further, Im talking about saving my dog from being ripped to shreds by another so frankly couldnt give a toss about that law. Im not talking about carrying a weapon with intent, Im talking about protecting myself and my dog if the situation arose.

By dangerous dogs, I mean a dog that is aggressive to people or other dogs and is capable of inflicting serious injuries. My other dog has never been in a fight, because he has never had the chance. He snarls at other dogs and lunges towards them. Thats dangerous in my books! He is capable of inflicting serious harm on a smaller dog. For that reason, I consider it would be dangerous to let him off the lead. He loves people, and once he gets to know a dog, he is fine. Its the first meetings that are a problem. That being said, I am responsible enough to know that he cant be trusted off the lead.


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

Ang2 said:


> Smokeybear - If carrying hair spray constitutes carrying a dangerous weapon then most women are breaking the law! Further, Im talking about saving my dog from being ripped to shreds by another so frankly couldnt give a toss about that law. Im not talking about carry a weapon with intent, Im talking about protecting myself and my dog if the situation arose.


But as we've said, hairspray or anything like that would be useless against a dog intent on ripping yours to shreds. Plus with a spray you've gotta be able to aim it (pretty much impossible as fighting dogs aren't still) and hope the wind isn't blowing in the wrong direction and blowing the spray back into your own dogs face.

Prevention is a hell of a lot better and easier than breaking up a real dog fight. Brush up on dog body language and behaviour so you can avoid dodgy looking situations before they're an issue, learn to body block and use your voice and if everything fails you'll probably find you do whatever you need to to prevent your dog being seriously injured or killed regardless of how stupid or ill advised it may be.

And ALL dogs are capable of inflicting serious injury, even the usually friendly ones


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

Ang2 said:


> Smokeybear - If carrying hair spray constitutes carrying a dangerous weapon then most women are breaking the law! Further, Im talking about saving my dog from being ripped to shreds by another so frankly couldnt give a toss about that law. Im not talking about carrying a weapon with intent, Im talking about protecting myself and my dog if the situation arose.
> 
> *BUT YOU ARE carrying a weapon with intent as the sole purpose for carrying hairspray on your dog walks would be to use as a potential weapon. When I walk my dogs I do not carry hairspray!
> 
> ...


If you have a dangerous dog that snarls and lunges at other dogs then good for you for keeping it on the lead and keeping other dogs safe, I certainly appreciate it.

Your view is no different from those people who wish to carry knives or other lethal weapons JUST IN CASE they get attacked.


----------



## Bisbow (Feb 20, 2012)

Thank God I have neer been in that position but at the training school I took Holly to in her youth we were told "If possible clamp your hand over the dogs nose so it can't breath and it will have to let go"

As I said, I have never been in that position so I don'tknow if it would work, and I hope I never have to try it.

Has anyone tried that


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

Bisbow said:


> Thank God I have neer been in that position but at the training school I took Holly to in her youth we were told "If possible clamp your hand over the dogs nose so it can't breath and it will have to let go"
> 
> *No I would never put my fingers near those 42 lethal weapons and of course depriving a dog of oxygen means that you raise its aggression so, like using the noose, not a good idea! *
> 
> ...


If you want to learn how to handle very dangerous dogs which attack then you should go on a course by those who have the required skills, knowledge, ability, training and experience rather than take the words of people who generally have never have laid their hands on 40+kg dog of such a temperament which can kill you!


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

pjchary6481 said:


> http:// *hop.clickbank.net/?*


_Spam - DON'T click that link._


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

Smokeybear - Are you taking this thread seriously????? Or are you bored???

I started a very serious thread and asked advice from others on what to do if this happened to them. Reading the stories of others, they clearly never thought it would happen to them. So although Im not expecting it to happen, I would like to be equipped with the knowledge of the best defence - just in case. 

A tin of hair spray is not an illegal weapon for god's sake! It would not inflict injury or harm - moreso irritation and distraction. If I wanted to be a prat, I would be carrying a knife to stab any potential attacker - but anyone would think thats what I was suggesting by your replies.


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

If you wish to carry hairspray and you then use it on a dog you had better be prepared for the consequences from a) the dog b) your dog c) from the other owner and d) the law.

Be my guest.

Or you can follow the advice of some others here and put yourself at further risk by some of the inadvisable courses of actions they promote.

If you wish to ignore the advice from those with the relevant skills, knowledge, ability, training and experience offered to help, that is of course your choice.

Equip yourself as you think fit.


----------



## ClaireandDaisy (Jul 4, 2010)

May I suggest the OP spends her time and money retraining her dog instead of looking for weapons? 
These books are very good:
The Dog Aggression Workbook by James O`Heare
Fight! by Jean Donaldson. 

The best defence against dog attacks is a well trained dog that you can recall immediately, vigilance and avoiding action. Turn round and leave the area swiftly.
The worst thing you can do in a dog fight is to escalate the aggression by joining in. If you seriously think you will, in the case of a fight, root about in your bag for your hair spray, take the cap off then carefully get into a position where you can squirt the dog in the eyes without said dog retaliating then I think you have been watching too many bad films.


----------



## Guest (Jul 8, 2012)

Another vote for prevention here. 

I am the idiot who will jump in the in the middle of a fight, and I have paid for it too. I dont recommend it at all. 
If youre going to anyway, its worth taking a minute to see if you can tell which dog is getting ready to give up. Then concentrate your efforts on the other dog. Get that one separated (Ive used a leash wrapped around the dogs waist with a well timed pull when he goes to re-grip) and get ready to yell and block the other dog in case they decide to jump back in. Also get ready to be re-directed on by the dog you just pulled away. It doesnt always happen, but its very likely.

I find the people who suggest choking a dog off have never actually tried it with a dog souped up on adrenaline. The first thing the dog will do is grip HARDER when he feels himself being choked off. The wheelbarrow thing is another one that in practice has never worked for me.

Honestly, I think the majority of folks dont know the difference between a full blown fight and a scuffle. A scuffle can be really scary and result in injuries, but you can walk in to it yelling and waving your arms in your best scary primate impersonation and get a response out of the dogs. With a fight, you cant. 

So again, prevention is the best medicine.


----------



## 912142 (Mar 28, 2011)

Ang2 said:


> Smokeybear - Are you taking this thread seriously????? Or are you bored???
> 
> I started a very serious thread and asked advice from others on what to do if this happened to them. Reading the stories of others, they clearly never thought it would happen to them. So although Im not expecting it to happen, I would like to be equipped with the knowledge of the best defence - just in case.
> 
> A tin of hair spray is not an illegal weapon for god's sake! It would not inflict injury or harm - moreso irritation and distraction. If I wanted to be a prat, I would be carrying a knife to stab any potential attacker - but anyone would think thats what I was suggesting by your replies.


You may think that using a hairspray on a dog is safe, however, the spray itself can make an individual and/or animal hallucinate which would make any situation with a powerful dog 10 times worse apart from the fact that lungs and eyes can be damaged beyond repair and can even kill. Hairspray is fast becoming a recretational drug and as with all other drugs that are inhaled your body never gets used to them unlike other forms of drug. One inhalation can kill.


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

ClaireandDaisy said:


> May I suggest the OP spends her time and money retraining her dog instead of looking for weapons?
> These books are very good:
> The Dog Aggression Workbook by James O`Heare
> Fight! by Jean Donaldson.
> ...


Re training my dog for WHAT???


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

smokeybear said:


> If you want to learn how to handle very dangerous dogs which attack then you should go on a course by those who have the required skills, knowledge, ability, training and experience rather than take the words of people who generally have never have laid their hands on 40+kg dog of such a temperament which can kill you!


Would be interested in how to find out about these courses as I've never seen any advertised anywhere. I've resorted to strangling a dog to make it let go of mine which I know isn't advisable but when you're stuck in the middle of a field on your own with 2 dogs hell bent on killing each other...well you do whatever you can.


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

Sarah1983 said:


> Would be interested in how to find out about these courses as I've never seen any advertised anywhere. I've resorted to strangling a dog to make it let go of mine which I know isn't advisable but when you're stuck in the middle of a field on your own with 2 dogs hell bent on killing each other...well you do whatever you can.


NASDU do them or used to


----------



## ClaireandDaisy (Jul 4, 2010)

Ang2 said:


> Re training my dog for WHAT???


Not to be aggressive around other dogs. 
No need to shout btw.


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

smokeybear said:


> NASDU do them or used to


Cheers, will look into them.


----------



## ClaireandDaisy (Jul 4, 2010)

I have seen a man break up a full on dog fight. 
The man took his dogs` back legs and raised them. He then `flipped` them a few times until it worked. . This was a drug dealer (I later was told) with his Pit Bull who was trying to kill my GSD. 
If anyone really thinks of trying this - the dogs legs were dislocated and the pain must have been immense but it still took several `flips` before the dog let go. 
Then he had to grab the dog to stop it killing him. 
Do you really think you could do that?

I have used the `wheelbarrow method` on my own dog to break up a fight - but she knew it was me and therefore didn`t turn and bite me. So I wouldn`t use it on someone else`s dog unless it was restrained in some way as well.


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

ClaireandDaisy said:


> Not to be aggressive around other dogs.
> No need to shout btw.


Im not talking about my dog being aggressive. Im talking about being attacked by another dog.


----------



## Guest (Jul 8, 2012)

Ang2 said:


> A tin of hair spray is not an illegal weapon for god's sake! It would not inflict injury or harm - moreso irritation and distraction. If I wanted to be a prat, I would be carrying a knife to stab any potential attacker - but anyone would think thats what I was suggesting by your replies.


Maybe Ive been underestimating hair spray all these years, dont really use it that often, but the last time I used the stuff, it came out in a gentle mist. Unless you point it mere inches from the dogs nose or eyes, I cant see it doing anything at all. And even then, I cant see a dog high on adrenaline caring about getting sprayed anyway.

A knife is also a bad idea as most people dont know how to wield them effectively and would end up just stabbing the dog in the rib or something which would only serve to further piss him off (if he even notices), certainly wouldn't stop an attack.


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

ClaireandDaisy said:


> I have seen a man break up a full on dog fight.
> The man took his dogs` back legs and raised them. He then `flipped` them a few times until it worked. . This was a drug dealer (I later was told) with his Pit Bull who was trying to kill my GSD.
> If anyone really thinks of trying this - the dogs legs were dislocated and the pain must have been immense but it still took several `flips` before the dog let go.
> Then he had to grab the dog to stop it killing him.
> ...


No, I dont think I could do that! Which is why I started this thread for sensible answers and realistic solutions.

That dog that attacked yours should never have been off the lead. This is my point - if someone allows their dangerous dog off the lead and it attacks you or your dog, what is the best action.


----------



## ClaireandDaisy (Jul 4, 2010)

Ang2 said:


> Im not talking about my dog being aggressive. Im talking about being attacked by another dog.


you said in your first post...

I have two dogs. One is a large breed and although great with people, he is aggressive to other dogs until he knows them. For this reason, he is not let off the lead NEVER!


----------



## Jobeth (May 23, 2010)

I don't think it is a good idea to let any dog bounce over to an unknown dog or owner. As much as you risk the other dog not wanting it you also risk your dog being kicked by a protective owner. Mine are both 'friendly', but are only allowed off lead with dogs when I know the owner and know that the dogs are going to be ok.
As well as agressive dogs you also have to be aware that some dogs are old and ill and don't want to be approached either.


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

ClaireandDaisy said:


> I have seen a man break up a full on dog fight.
> The man took his dogs` back legs and raised them. He then `flipped` them a few times until it worked. . This was a drug dealer (I later was told) with his Pit Bull who was trying to kill my GSD.
> If anyone really thinks of trying this - the dogs legs were dislocated and the pain must have been immense but it still took several `flips` before the dog let go.
> Then he had to grab the dog to stop it killing him.
> Do you really think you could do that?


Yet they make it sound so easy in books and online, just pick the dogs back legs up and walk them backwards. I tried that with the one that had hold of Rupert, he didn't care. Nor did he care that his back legs were in the air while Rupert mauled his back end.



> I find the people who suggest choking a dog off have never actually tried it with a dog souped up on adrenaline. The first thing the dog will do is grip HARDER when he feels himself being choked off


I've done it coz I simply couldn't think of anything else to do by this point and it was clear he wasn't gonna let go of his own accord. Had to strangle him until he passed out though, it certainly wasn't quick or easy. Had he turned on me I'd have been in trouble but I never even gave that a thought at the time.

As I say, it's all very well people saying that stuff is ill advised or stupid but however ill advised or stupid something was there's no way I'd just be able to stand by and let my dog be torn into without trying everything I could think of. I'm just glad attacks like this aren't that common!


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

ClaireandDaisy said:


> you said in your first post...
> 
> I have two dogs. One is a large breed and although great with people, he is aggressive to other dogs until he knows them. For this reason, he is not let off the lead NEVER!


My dog being aggressive is not the issue. The one that could be aggressive is never off the lead, so he is not running free to attack another dog and is kept in check when we approach other dog walkers. If its someone we havent seen before, I will shout to them in advance to warn that he is aggressive to other dogs, incase their dog is likely to run up and jump on him.

However, this would not stop us from being attacked by an aggressive dog that was running free off the lead.


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

Sarah1983 said:


> I've done it coz I simply couldn't think of anything else to do by this point and it was clear he wasn't gonna let go of his own accord. Had to strangle him until he passed out though, it certainly wasn't quick or easy. Had he turned on me I'd have been in trouble but I never even gave that a thought at the time.
> 
> As I say, it's all very well people saying that stuff is ill advised or stupid but however ill advised or stupid something was there's no way I'd just be able to stand by and let my dog be torn into without trying everything I could think of. I'm just glad attacks like this aren't that common!


Expectation management is key however, some people reading some of these posts may be tempted to try and string up a dog way out of their league and put THEMSELVES in a potentially FATAL situation!

If someone untrained tried to do this to one of my dogs (for whatever reason) and I was not there, they could be SERIOUSLY MAIMED for LIFE.

To me, this is horrifying as it is entirely AVOIDABLE.

It is no different to me than people walking on to a frozen lake to try and save their dogs who end up losing their lives whilst their dog hops back on to dry land.

The best thing to do is prevent by observation, blocking etc.

The next best thing to do is THINK, CAREFULLY.


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

Sarah1983 said:


> Yet they make it sound so easy in books and online, just pick the dogs back legs up and walk them backwards. I tried that with the one that had hold of Rupert, he didn't care. Nor did he care that his back legs were in the air while Rupert mauled his back end.
> 
> I've done it coz I simply couldn't think of anything else to do by this point and it was clear he wasn't gonna let go of his own accord. Had to strangle him until he passed out though, it certainly wasn't quick or easy. Had he turned on me I'd have been in trouble but I never even gave that a thought at the time.
> 
> As I say, it's all very well people saying that stuff is ill advised or stupid but however ill advised or stupid something was there's no way I'd just be able to stand by and let my dog be torn into without trying everything I could think of. I'm just glad attacks like this aren't that common!


Sarah, thank you for reply. That must have been horrendous for you. I would do exactly the same, wade in and try and save my dog. You are very lucky not to have been seriously injured yourself.

I hope it never happens to me.


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

smokeybear said:


> Expectation management is key however, some people reading some of these posts may be tempted to try and string up a dog way out of their league and put THEMSELVES in a potentially FATAL situation!
> 
> If someone untrained tried to do this to one of my dogs (for whatever reason) and I was not there, they could be SERIOUSLY MAIMED for LIFE.
> 
> ...


I can see where you're coming from but it seems the only easily available information on what to do in a situation like this is ill advised and has good potential to get yourself hurt. I honestly cannot think of a way to break up a serious dog fight that doesn't involve some risk so I guess I'd do stupid things if the situation ever arises again.

I fully agree that prevention is the best thing but there's always that chance, one mistake and you've got a dog fight on your hands.


----------



## Guest (Jul 8, 2012)

Asking how to protect your dog once the attack has happened, is a bit like asking what to do when someone runs a red light and broadsides you. I suppose there might be some trick driver out there who could drive through a crash, but for us mere mortals, you simply hang on for the ride. 

Prevention-wise though, there is a lot you can do. You can pay attention, keep your eyes on the road, stay off the phone, dont get distracted by the kids arguing in the back seat, look both ways even if you have the right of way, buckle up and make sure passengers are securely buckled too, keep your car in good working order and if you can afford it buy one with higher safety ratings. But in the end, sometimes $h1t happens, and you just deal with the aftermath as best you can.

The odds of a dog being broadsided by a dog that you never saw coming who goes in to full-on kill mode instantly are really, really slim. It happens, sure, but Id be far more worried about my dog getting skunked, hit by a car, quilled by a porcupine, etc.


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

Ang2 said:


> No, I dont think I could do that! Which is why I started this thread for sensible answers and realistic solutions.
> 
> That dog that attacked yours should never have been off the lead. This is my point - if someone allows their dangerous dog off the lead and it attacks you or your dog, what is the best action.


Sometimes though DA dogs are offlead and under control - there is a rottie here that the owner has told me will react aggressively if a dog runs up to her, but will ignore dogs otherwise and not run over to attack. I put mine on the lead when I see them, let them have their walk and let mine back off again once they have left the fields just in case he goes over- I think the owner has been responsible in letting me know the possible outcome of my dog running up and she has the same right to use the dog walking fields that I do.


----------



## moonviolet (Aug 11, 2011)

I can give you a what not to do in an attack situation. Attack being different from a fight in that there is only one active participant. Do not, even if you are physically capable, pull the attacking dog off while still biting the other dog. This is likely to lead to skin being torn and puncture wounds becoming a torn flap of skin, a much more complex injury.

Prevention is the key, is the realistic approach, avoiding any dog who's body language does not look good, avoiding any dog who's owner appears to have little interest or control etc etc. If you do these things you minimise your risk and like anything in life thats the best we can do. Sometimes sh*t still happens but these serious attacks are pretty rare if you take reasonable precautions. Most things people describe as attacks are little more than scuffles.


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

Ang2 said:


> Sarah, thank you for reply. That must have been horrendous for you. I would do exactly the same, wade in and try and save my dog. You are very lucky not to have been seriously injured yourself.
> 
> I hope it never happens to me.


I was very lucky not to have been hurt myself. I found out later this dog had previously killed another dog and should have been kept leashed and muzzled at all times. Had my dog been a small dog I believe he too would have been killed. The dog came charging across a field to him, Rupe rolled onto his back and the dog just went at him. The other owner just stood there screaming and crying about how he'd never done anything like this before and was about as much use as a chocolate teapot.

A few weeks later the same thing happened again. Same dog, same silly cow, same tears and protestations that the dog had never done anything like this before.


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

Sarah, this is exactly what Im talking about. People who know that their dogs are potentially dangerous and let them off the lead.

Did you report her to the police or the authorities? My larger dog would love to run around the fields with my other dog, but I just wouldnt put another dog at risk. It would be totally irresponsible.


----------



## Guest (Jul 8, 2012)

moonviolet said:


> I can give you a what not to do in an attack situation. Attack being different from a fight in that there is only one active participant. Do not, even if you are physically capable, pull the attacking dog off while still biting the other dog. This is likely to lead to skin being torn and puncture wounds becoming a torn flap of skin, a much more complex injury.
> 
> *Prevention is the key, is the realistic approach, avoiding any dog who's body language does not look good, avoiding any dog who's owner appears to have little interest or control etc etc. If you do these things you minimise your risk and like anything in life thats the best we can do. *Sometimes sh*t still happens but these serious attacks are pretty rare if you take reasonable precautions. Most things people describe as attacks are little more than scuffles.


Very nicely put!!
Another terrific prevention tactic is to make sure YOUR dog isnt indirectly provoking a dog with iffy body language by staring at him. Watch isnt just for reactive dogs. If we see a dog whos looking a bit too amped for my taste and an owner who looks a little out of their league, I tell mine to do something that involves focusing on me, that in itself is often enough to diffuse a potentially volatile situation.


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

Sarah1983 said:


> ... I found out later this dog had previously killed another dog & should have been.. leashed & muzzled at all times.
> ... The other owner just stood there screaming and crying about how he'd never done anything like this before
> and was about as much use as a chocolate teapot.
> 
> ...


what an eejit. : Glad U were OK!


----------



## Guest (Jul 8, 2012)

One thing I MUST say before I go further. Someone postulated that blocking a dogs nose will make it let go. Believe me, dogs can breath in through their mouths, and even gripped on to a dog, there is a huge amount of air flowing in through the mouth. Promise you it doesn't work. Don't waste that 5/10 mins until you realise. 

As usual, if anything seems beyond grizzly, then it can't be done or shouldn't be done. It is amazing that anything is comprehensible, because if grizzly can't do it, then of course, no one else can. I have waded into dog fights... I don't want to exaggerate... about 8 times, that I remember. I may have forgotten a couple of small ones, over decades. I would never willingly allow such a thing to happen so that Grizzly can understand how it is done. I really prefer to pretend grizzly doesn't exist. I am short, fat, heavy and female. I have thrice pulled a 25/30ish kg dog off a smaller dog of 10 ish kgs The easiest way was the lead. The one thing the dog would NOT do, was let go. Slipping the lead under the chin, was the calmest and easiest way I have ever done it. Yes I risk getting bitten, but I would do that to save a dog. It wouldn't surprise me if that is beyond grizzly's comprehension. I am pleased to say, we seem like VERY different people. The second occasion, I wrote of elsewhere, where I had NO collar or lead - or help. I literally came in behind the large aggressor and, with nothing to hold but skin, which was useless and dangerous, I had no other choice but to grab the large dogs jaws and pull them apart, until the smaller dog fell free. I had to avoid the smaller dog screaming and trying to bite at the larger dog, while I forced the jaws open, and my legs were clamped either side of the dog, so it couldn't reverse or wriggle free. My problem was I had no way to get the small dog to safety.

I had no help, and was unable to let up any force, as the dog was still quite mad. My fingers felt like limp lettuce, they screamed with the ache of holding the jaws open, and i was holding at the front, of course, not near the hinge of the jaws. but there was no other option. The adrenalin lowered, but we were frozen together. The dog started to suffer. It's jaws held as far apart as possible. It was calming, moving it's tongue, trying to swallow. I managed to gasp you sh*t of a dog. you etc. The dog had come off the insane fury, and was feeling uncomfortable and probably worried. I managed to get a couple of clouts, to the head, to make me feel better, making sure I held the bottom jaw down,(open) and as close to the neck as possible. I still don't know how I did it, as my fingers felt they had the power of wilted lettuce, but I clawed the scruff into a handful of skin, and dragged the dog to a front yard, with a gate, with no people or animals in it, got him behind the gate, and punched him and felt marvellous about doing it. The dog had collapsed into an apologetic pile. This may not have happened with another dog, but then, I may not have had no lead or collar, tie or belt, or person to help me, the next time. Had I had someone to help, even just getting me something to use at the neck, would have given me a much easier time. No doubt you can't see how, grizzly, but then happily, the world doesn't have to wait around for you to catch up.

With every year, I grow more infirm, and I do have some arthritis in the fingers, from a few bites that got me, sometimes due to my early inexperience, and I am probably less likely to be able to do as much with strength, but sadly, I am getting heavier, my centre of gravity, is getting lower, so I am harder to knock over. I still manage to bury the limp dead bodies of my largest pet sheep, that my vet estimates at 100kgs, without another humans help. Sometimes with fury, frustration and tears. Theoretically, it is pretty impossible. 

I have dragged/wrestled off about 8 dogs that were SERIOUSLY savage. The heaviest, approaching? 40 kgs. Some, I believe were life and death, between dogs, and many can be so, tho they don't seem to be so, in their fearfulness. Sometimes it is the chance position of a canine tooth. This has taken a lot of my time, and I'm wasting it on someone I prefer to ignore, at the best of times. I don't care if you can't comprehend or believe me, smokeybacon, because your opinion is valueless to me. Kindly refrain on commenting on things I do, that you can't understand or do. I ignore your pompous remarks, statements I could rip apart, unless you upset people I like. Let us be happy in a world where we don't exist.

Whilst on this, I did think of a way to guarantee the aggressor dog will let go, tho there is no guarantee for how long, AND IT HAS A HIGH PROBABILITY OF KILLING THE AGGRESSOR, and I would not like to do that. If you can get a hose into it's throat, and turn it on , the water may shoot into it's throat and if into it's stomach, it will probably choke and let go quickly, but if the pipe is into it's windpipe, you would kill it. If it is alive, then loose and not dead, you have a really mad dog loose and threatening to wet it might cause it to stop fighting to laugh, if it has found a sense of humour. Saving dogs probably should only be done by the experienced, the brave adrenalin filled, with streetsmarts, or an analytical mind. If you are a 40 kg girlie 20 yr old, just scream for help, I guess... What can I say? I have done it numerous times, to save a life. I did it. I cannot guarantee you will see where you have to put your fingers, etc. If you do get to that point, someone is holding the jaws apart, you could slide a piece of wood in the gap of the jaws, to lessen the likelihood of the jaws snapping shut, in the one second when the fingers are tired or weak, to crunch fingers. To carry on after that... and I have.... Actually, the adrenalin gets you through. Afterwards, tho...ouch!!!


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

Well, I just found this on the internet.

Dog Pepper Spray by Mace - Canine Repellent


----------



## Guest (Jul 8, 2012)

There are times when attacks happen and whatever you do to allow for safety, something happens. Something breaks, a half wit who is told NOT to do something does it, or is told to do something and does not. Of course prevention is better than cure. I have double gated any potential problem areas, at my place, but if I am away from home and someone opens a gate without looking. It does happen. That is why this discussion has come up for the 2nd time since I have been on this forum. If there has been time, I haven't had the problem. These things have blown up - reaction is in the seconds it has happened.


----------



## catz4m8z (Aug 27, 2008)

Flippin' heck Househen! Why have you been involved in so many dog fights??
Do you work for a rescue/kennel??


----------



## moonviolet (Aug 11, 2011)

Ang2 said:


> Well, I just found this on the internet.
> 
> Dog Pepper Spray by Mace - Canine Repellent


If you are in the Uk this defintiely won't be legal and how on earth would you keep it away from your own dog? or yourself for that matter.

I don't wish to sound unsympathetic but please try to get some perspective.

It's very very unlikely. My dog was attacked by a dog but the circumstances were pretty freak and I do not carry hairspray , pepperspray, pet corrector spray etc etc they are just not necessary and in the case of a full on red mist attack I doubt they would do anything.


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

At the end of the day when a dog fight is going on, as with any kind of fight, having analytical and rational thoughts generally go out the window and you react by instinct, some people just scream, some jump in and end up injured, some manage to break it up somehow but until it happens you have no idea how you will react. If you really want to build up confidence and train yourself to react appropriately and effectively I'd look into some kind of course.


----------



## snoopydo (Jan 19, 2010)

Bisbow said:


> Thank God I have neer been in that position but at the training school I took Holly to in her youth we were told "If possible clamp your hand over the dogs nose so it can't breath and it will have to let go"
> 
> As I said, I have never been in that position so I don'tknow if it would work, and I hope I never have to try it.
> 
> Has anyone tried that


Hell NO : Clamping your hand over the nose of a snarling Biting Dog...Think your more likely to get your hand bitten off. You'd have to avoid the teeth to get to the nose.


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

moonviolet said:


> If you are in the Uk this defintiely won't be legal and how on earth would you keep it away from your own dog? or yourself for that matter.
> 
> I don't wish to sound unsympathetic but please try to get some perspective.
> 
> It's very very unlikely. My dog was attacked by a dog but the circumstances were pretty freak and I do not carry hairspray , pepperspray, pet corrector spray etc etc they are just not necessary and in the case of a full on red mist attack I doubt they would do anything.


Well I imagine we would all get blasted! But if it broke up the fight and saved my dog from fatal injury, how can it be a bad thing.

And whilst discussing the morals of whether or not to use it should the situation arise, remember that the police use it on PEOPLE!

I am a huge animal lover, and would never want to have to be in this kind of position anyway. Having said that, I cannot think of anything more horrific than helplessly watching your baby being ragged to death. And yes, its very unlikely, but why do we wear seatbelts - just incase!


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

Ang2 said:


> . And yes, its very unlikely, but why do we wear seatbelts - just incase!


Because the risk of DEATH and SERIOUS injury from NOT wearing them is EXTREMELY HIGH.

Risk is about PROBABILITY not POSSIBILITY.

It is highly probable that should you have a car crash and not wear a seat belt that you will be extremely seriously injured and the risks increase as the speed does.

There are statistics to prove the HUGE drop in fatalities and serious life altering injuries.

It is highly IMPROBABLE that your dog will be seriously attacked by another dog.

This is how you determine risk.


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

smokeybear said:


> Because the risk of DEATH and SERIOUS injury from NOT wearing them is EXTREMELY HIGH.
> 
> Risk is about PROBABILITY not POSSIBILITY.
> 
> ...


Well no actually, that would depend entirely on where you live. Many places in this country have awfully behaved, aggressive, horrible dogs who have been brought up with no social skills and a very bad temperament. Compare that place to a more rural setting where working dogs are around and only THEN is it high improrbable that your dog will be seriously attacked by another.


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

smokeybear said:


> Because the risk of DEATH and SERIOUS injury from NOT wearing them is EXTREMELY HIGH.
> 
> Risk is about PROBABILITY not POSSIBILITY.
> 
> ...


and your point is??????

Well thats great, so I have nothing to worry about ever. In fact, its NEVER likely to happen to me is it? I walk my dogs for an hour every day over open fields, meeting some 30/50 other dogs along the way, some of which I've never seen before. So what exactly, in your expert opinion, are the odds of my dog being savagely attacked?


----------



## leighhawkes89 (Jun 1, 2012)

This may infuriate people but i got told ... that if a dog came up to my dog and started being aggressive and attacked my dog the best thing to do is let mine off the lead so he isnt restricted ( i know i dont see how this helps) as this has happened before a labrador off a lead came bounding over to mine which was on a lead and was being really aggrassive and i didnt no what to do and they were both going for each other....


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

househens said:


> One thing I MUST say before I go further. Someone postulated that blocking a dogs nose will make it let go. Believe me, dogs can breath in through their mouths, and even gripped on to a dog, there is a huge amount of air flowing in through the mouth. Promise you it doesn't work. Don't waste that 5/10 mins until you realise.
> 
> As usual, if anything seems beyond grizzly, then it can't be done or shouldn't be done. It is amazing that anything is comprehensible, because if grizzly can't do it, then of course, no one else can. I have waded into dog fights... I don't want to exaggerate... about 8 times, that I remember. I may have forgotten a couple of small ones, over decades. I would never willingly allow such a thing to happen so that Grizzly can understand how it is done. I really prefer to pretend grizzly doesn't exist. I am short, fat, heavy and female. I have thrice pulled a 25/30ish kg dog off a smaller dog of 10 ish kgs The easiest way was the lead. The one thing the dog would NOT do, was let go. Slipping the lead under the chin, was the calmest and easiest way I have ever done it. Yes I risk getting bitten, but I would do that to save a dog. It wouldn't surprise me if that is beyond grizzly's comprehension. I am pleased to say, we seem like VERY different people. The second occasion, I wrote of elsewhere, where I had NO collar or lead - or help. I literally came in behind the large aggressor and, with nothing to hold but skin, which was useless and dangerous, I had no other choice but to grab the large dogs jaws and pull them apart, until the smaller dog fell free. I had to avoid the smaller dog screaming and trying to bite at the larger dog, while I forced the jaws open, and my legs were clamped either side of the dog, so it couldn't reverse or wriggle free. My problem was I had no way to get the small dog to safety.
> 
> ...


What a hero, and do you wear your underpants over your tights luv? 

ROFLMAO

Rip away dear, I can hardly wait. Touched a nerve did we? :cornut:


----------



## moonviolet (Aug 11, 2011)

Ang2 said:


> Well I imagine we would all get blasted! But if it broke up the fight and saved my dog from fatal injury, how can it be a bad thing.
> 
> And whilst discussing the morals of whether or not to use it should the situation arise, remember that the police use it on PEOPLE!
> 
> I am a huge animal lover, and would never want to have to be in this kind of position anyway. Having said that, I cannot think of anything more horrific than helplessly watching your baby being ragged to death. And yes, its very unlikely, but why do we wear seatbelts - just incase!


With something like pepper spray , the attacking dog could react to it as an attack and actually bite and rag harder. I think you would be foolish to waste your money on it.

People can be reasoned with dogs can't.

For the record I didn't mention morals, I mentioned legality.


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

Ang2 said:


> and your point is??????
> 
> Well thats great, so I have nothing to worry about ever. In fact, its NEVER likely to happen to me is it? I walk my dogs for an hour every day over open fields, meeting some 30/50 other dogs along the way, some of which I've never seen before. So what exactly, in your expert opinion, are the odds of my dog being savagely attacked?


I wouldn't bother, you'll soon realise smokeybear is quite a negative, angry, harsh poster who rarely says anything truly constructive. It's rare for a dog to be mauled and killed by another dog, but I would guess that's probably because people are around to break up that fight, just as you're wanting to know how to do. In the past month I've seen 2 dog fights, both obviously broken up by owners, if they weren't around or did nothing there would have been injuries.


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

leighhawkes89 said:


> This may infuriate people but i got told ... that if a dog came up to my dog and started being aggressive and attacked my dog the best thing to do is let mine off the lead so he isnt restricted ( i know i dont see how this helps) as this has happened before a labrador off a lead came bounding over to mine which was on a lead and was being really aggrassive and i didnt no what to do and they were both going for each other....


I think sometimes yes this can help because your dog being restricted is likely to get more hurt, but it depends entirely on the situation. If the other dog has a harness on and an owner running over to grab it then it would probably be best to try and just pull your dog away until it can be broken up, if you let them off then they could be hard to get under control.


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

Ang2 said:


> and your point is??????
> 
> Well thats great, so I have nothing to worry about ever. In fact, its NEVER likely to happen to me is it? I walk my dogs for an hour every day over open fields, meeting some 30/50 other dogs along the way, some of which I've never seen before. So what exactly, in your expert opinion, are the odds of my dog being savagely attacked?


Have you made contingency plans for a plane hitting your house?

Have you a back up plan should a flood occur?

Have you organised your survival should there be an unexploded bomb in your garden?

If so, congratulations, as the odds of the above happening are greater than your dog being shredded limb from limb.


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

moonviolet said:


> With something like pepper spray , the attacking dog could react to it as an attack and actually bite and rag harder. I think you would be foolish to waste your money on it.
> 
> People can be reasoned with dogs can't.
> 
> For the record I didn't mention morals, I mentioned legality.


Precisely.


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

Ang2 said:


> Well I imagine we would all get blasted! But if it broke up the fight and saved my dog from fatal injury, how can it be a bad thing.


Of course NO action you could take could be a "bad thing" could it? 

So you take the view that the end justifies the means?

If you do, then I am sure the other dog owner may think the same which might mean you and your dog being at the mercy of someone who is prepared to use illegal measures to prevent your actions too.

They may think that carrying a knife is entirely reasonable.

Then of course you have the owner who may have a gun.

Where does it all end?


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

smokeybear said:


> Have you made contingency plans for a plane hitting your house?
> 
> Have you a back up plan should a flood occur?
> 
> ...


:lol: What a joke. Dogs being killed by others does happen in this country, we all know that so don't come up with ridiculous scenarios and pretend the likelihood is the same, how many peoples houses have been hit by planes in the UK in the past decade? And how many dogs have been killed by other dogs? Get back to me with some figures to show you're not being an idiot.


----------



## leighhawkes89 (Jun 1, 2012)

Phoolf said:


> I think sometimes yes this can help because your dog being restricted is likely to get more hurt, but it depends entirely on the situation. If the other dog has a harness on and an owner running over to grab it then it would probably be best to try and just pull your dog away until it can be broken up, if you let them off then they could be hard to get under control.


exactly i agree theres no way i could control 2 dogs fighting i would panic and wouldnt know what to do thankfully this has only happened once and the dog went back to owner when called thank goodness


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

Phoolf said:


> I wouldn't bother, you'll soon realise smokeybear is quite a negative, angry, harsh poster who rarely says anything truly constructive. It's rare for a dog to be mauled and killed by another dog, but I would guess that's probably because people are around to break up that fight, just as you're wanting to know how to do. In the past month I've seen 2 dog fights, both obviously broken up by owners, if they weren't around or did nothing there would have been injuries.


I am not angry but nobody can control the opinions of others, informed or not.

And as for owners breaking up fights, well if the owners were not there, surely the dogs are unlikely to be there either? thus a fight would not have occurred and thus it would be a non event (apart from in your imagination) :lol:

Obviously this logic has escaped you........... :biggrin:


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

Phoolf said:


> :lol: What a joke. Dogs being killed by others does happen in this country, we all know that so don't come up with ridiculous scenarios and pretend the likelihood is the same, how many peoples houses have been hit by planes in the UK in the past decade? And how many dogs have been killed by other dogs? Get back to me with some figures to show you're not being an idiot.


Planes have hit houses in this country.

Floods occur in this country (even as we speak)

And plenty of unexploded bombs have been found in gardens.

So get back to me with some figures re the above and the recorded cases of dogs being killed by other dogs to mitigate the idiotic statements you have already made. :biggrin:

No need for ridiculous scenarios, the above are events which have occurred (unless of course you think floods are ridiculous scenarios, incredibly rare and are a figment of the imagination...........


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

smokeybear said:


> I am not angry but nobody can control the opinions of others, informed or not.
> 
> And as for owners breaking up fights, well if the owners were not there, surely the dogs are unlikely to be there either? thus a fight would not have occurred and thus it would be a non event (apart from in your imagination) :lol:
> 
> Obviously this logic has escaped you........... :biggrin:


You talking about logic, there's a good one. You've never seen a stray then I take it? Where do you live that is such a paradise? God forbid in some weird, parallel universe two stray dogs happened to be in proximity with nobody around and aggression problems. Come to think of it this happens in many countries like Romania, Turkey and parts of South America. But lets not let a bit of logic get in the way of being a negative nancy eh? That would spoil your fun.


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

smokeybear said:


> Planes have hit houses in this country.
> 
> Floods occur in this country (even as we speak)
> 
> ...


Got any figures yourself? You seem pretty internet savvy, you should know that the person who initially starts coming out with outrageous statements is the one who should be backing it up, not the other way round. It seems to me you don't fancy proving your point.


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

Phoolf said:


> You talking about logic, there's a good one. You've never seen a stray then I take it? Where do you live that is such a paradise? God forbid in some weird, parallel universe two stray dogs happened to be in proximity with nobody around and aggression problems. Come to think of it this happens in many countries like Romania, Turkey and parts of South America. But lets not let a bit of logic get in the way of being a negative nancy eh? That would spoil your fun.


Yes I have seen a stray dog, rescued quite a few in fact.

I think you are confusing STRAY dogs with FERAL dogs, but do not let the facts get in the way of a piece of unfounded vitriol eh?

And in my experience FERAL dogs rarely get into fights.

A common mistake......


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

smokeybear said:


> Yes I have seen a stray dog, rescued quite a few in fact.
> 
> I think you are confusing STRAY dogs with FERAL dogs, but do not let the facts get in the way of a piece of unfounded vitriol eh?
> 
> ...


The only vitriol being spouted is by you, as per.


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

Phoolf said:


> Got any figures yourself? You seem pretty internet savvy, you should know that the person who initially starts coming out with outrageous statements is the one who should be backing it up, not the other way round. It seems to me you don't fancy proving your point.


But it is not important to *me *to prove anything, it is only important to YOU, so if it is important to YOU, the onus is on YOU to disprove it.

I do not need to back up anything. Anyone can data mine to put together any figures they want. Did you not know that? 

I could not care less what you believe.


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

smokeybear said:


> But it is not important to *me *to prove anything, it is only important to YOU, so if it is important to YOU, the onus is on YOU to disprove it.
> 
> I do not need to back up anything. Anyone can data mine to put together any figures they want. Did you not know that?
> 
> I could not care less what you believe.


Seems like we should carry on ignoring you talking out of your ass then seeing as you have nothing to back it up.

I'll let people give actual advice now instead of back and forthing with someone who has very little useful information to say on the topic.


----------



## leighhawkes89 (Jun 1, 2012)

hmmm heres one ...do females or males show more aggression? i always find that male on male show more aggression then bitch on bitch but i could be wrong?


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

leighhawkes89 said:


> hmmm heres one ...do females or males show more aggression? i always find that male on male show more aggression then bitch on bitch but i could be wrong?


Depends on the breed, some show same sex aggression regardless but I think intact males tend to have more of a problem with other intact males in general.


----------



## Guest (Jul 8, 2012)

smokeybear said:


> Yes I have seen a stray dog, rescued quite a few in fact.
> 
> I think you are confusing STRAY dogs with FERAL dogs, but do not let the facts get in the way of a piece of unfounded vitriol eh?
> 
> ...


This is true IME as well. Ferals dont survive long nursing injuries from fights. Its in their best interest to avoid them altogether. Ive never had an issue with loose feral dogs, though we do encounter them, they give us a wide berth. The loose dogs who tend to challenge our space bubble are either defending their perceived territory, or have owners nearby inadvertently egging them on.


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

Phoolf said:


> Seems like we should carry on ignoring you talking out of your ass then seeing as you have nothing to back it up.
> 
> I'll let people give actual advice now instead of back and forthing with someone who has very little useful information to say on the topic.


Perhaps you should spend a little more time in training your dog to come back when called then posting inane comments which contain not constructive advice at all.

Until and unless you can control a 5 month old puppy sufficiently to avoid it invading the space of another dog, you are really in no position to start posting "advice" are you?

Run along and make sure YOUR dog is not put at risk due to your lack of attention and training.


----------



## Howl (Apr 10, 2012)

ClaireandDaisy said:


> May I suggest the OP spends her time and money retraining her dog instead of looking for weapons?
> These books are very good:
> The Dog Aggression Workbook by James O`Heare
> Fight! by Jean Donaldson.
> ...


I completely agree sadly it isn't always possible. I couldn't have predicted how well behaved mine was despite the stress. All dogs were on lead, the owner had two out of control very DA dogs, one physically broke it's lead and ran up and attacked mine on her back biting her several times. Mine just stood there unreactive as did I for a second I couldn't believe what was happening, the owner did nothing besides screaming. I backed up to a fence with her and asked mine to sit where I pointed behind me and stay. Just trying to calmly stand in front. It felt like it took a long time before the owner (who I think was frightened of her own dog) came forward to get him. It wasn't easy from her perspective she had another DA dog and her kid and no extra hands. I couldn't have left the area as they were blocking the entrance to a ginnel if I had gone back it would meant me turning my back on the dog and resulting in a prolonged problem as they would have had to follow me. If she had backed up it would have meant the altercation might have happened next to a busy road. Worst place for it to happen. 
I doubt hairspray would have helped if I am honest or much else. I don't think much was preventable besides the other owner should not have taken both her dogs out if she couldn't control them together. 
Maybe a walking stick would have helped to give the dog something to bite to prevent it getting D. To create a kind of block? 
D was not approaching she was stood next to my side the whole time. 
It's a sensitive point and I know other members have had their on lead dogs attacked and in some instances killed by off lead dogs. I doubt I would have been able to protect D quite as well if it had been in an open field for example. 
When agressive off lead dogs have approached her before she has good body language and they usually calm very quickly when they meet her. 
I do think getting back on that horse is important I worried she would be scared of labs but she has bounced back no problems besides some puncture scabs. 
I agree that training is by far the best prevention. If your dog is at a stage where it will stay it makes it much easier to prevent further injury. If it had been E she would probably have panicked more and been a bit more difficult to stay still or barked because she was scared.


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

leighhawkes89 said:


> hmmm heres one ...do females or males show more aggression? i always find that male on male show more aggression then bitch on bitch but i could be wrong?


Aggression is just a behaviour (we have observed some on this thread) it does not define the dog.

It is not restricted to either sex or to entire members of either.

There are many factors and many triggers and often it is not aggression per say but defence shown by a fearful dog.

Truly dog aggressive dogs who go in for the kill are rare.


----------



## leighhawkes89 (Jun 1, 2012)

Phoolf said:


> Depends on the breed, some show same sex aggression regardless but I think intact males tend to have more of a problem with other intact males in general.


hmm ive had a little bit of aggression in my rottie cross staff when we first got gypsie and we went out walking he would be quite possesive of her if any other male went near he he would warn them away ... thankfully he hasnt done this for a while now... i thought it was because his hormonal and because he hasnt been 'done'.....but gypsie has no problem with any dogs :thumbup1:


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

smokeybear said:


> Perhaps you should spend a little more time in training your dog to come back when called then posting inane comments which contain not constructive advice at all.
> 
> Until and unless you can control a 5 month old puppy sufficiently to avoid it invading the space of another dog, you are really in no position to start posting "advice" are you?
> 
> Run along and make sure YOUR dog is not put at risk due to your lack of attention and training.


:lol: Oh do bugger off you negative idiot, if you think I give two hoots about your opinion regarding my dog you're very misguided.


----------



## leighhawkes89 (Jun 1, 2012)

smokeybear said:


> Aggression is just a behaviour (we have observed some on this thread) it does not define the dog.
> 
> It is not restricted to either sex or to entire members of either.
> 
> ...


i agree as i had a bit of a problem with my rottie cross staff being aggressive towards other male dogs when we first got gypsie and we went out walking he would warn other male dogs away from her .. so i assume thats out of protection ....i thought it was because he was hormonal and because he hadnt been done but i think its because gypsie is his girl lol

Thankfully he hasnt shown aggressive for a while as maybe he knows gypsie is his


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

leighhawkes89 said:


> hmm ive had a little bit of aggression in my rottie cross staff when we first got gypsie and we went out walking he would be quite possesive of her if any other male went near he he would warn them away ... thankfully he hasnt done this for a while now... i thought it was because his hormonal and because he hasnt been 'done'.....but gypsie has no problem with any dogs :thumbup1:


But that is not aggression that is resource guarding, a totally different issue and quite common with males that are walked with females etc.

That does not make your dog "aggressive" per se 

It is a bit like a husband telling lounge lizards to stay away from his wife


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

leighhawkes89 said:


> hmm ive had a little bit of aggression in my rottie cross staff when we first got gypsie and we went out walking he would be quite possesive of her if any other male went near he he would warn them away ... thankfully he hasnt done this for a while now... i thought it was because his hormonal and because he hasnt been 'done'.....but gypsie has no problem with any dogs :thumbup1:


I know some male dogs tend to get the backs up of other males when they're at a certain age due to hormones, the only dogs my parents dog does not get on with straight away are usually intact males (he is intact).


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

Phoolf said:


> :lol: Oh do bugger off you negative idiot, if you think I give two hoots about your opinion regarding my dog you're very misguided.


Still here............................ :lol:


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

smokeybear said:


> Still here............................ :lol:


Such a sad WUM with nothing better to do.


----------



## leighhawkes89 (Jun 1, 2012)

smokeybear said:


> But that is not aggression that is resource guarding, a totally different issue and quite common with males that are walked with females etc.
> 
> That does not make your dog "aggressive" per se
> 
> It is a bit like a husband telling lounge lizards to stay away from his wife


yeah i quickly found that out that he was guarding her its just horrible when you see dogs have ago at each other and their back hairs are all up its a bit scary.


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

Phoolf said:


> Such a sad WUM with nothing better to do.


I agree with you, it must be awful for you to have nothing left in your emptly life apart from posting pointless comments, but if it makes you feel better, please carry on I would hate to deprive you of one of the few activities open to you.


----------



## leighhawkes89 (Jun 1, 2012)

Phoolf said:


> I know some male dogs tend to get the backs up of other males when they're at a certain age due to hormones, the only dogs my parents dog does not get on with straight away are usually intact males (he is intact).


hmm well when we took bruno to meet my parents dogs they have 2 yorkies 1 male 1 female and a rottweiler who is female and bruno got along brilliantly with jasper the male but the other two hated him we wouldnt even let libby ( rottie) out of the gate to go play because she kept going for him over the gate and we jjust couldnt trust her. and cassie the femalew yorkie just kept barking at him and snarling .. GIRL POWER!


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

leighhawkes89 said:


> yeah i quickly found that out that he was guarding her its just horrible when you see dogs have ago at each other and their back hairs are all up its a bit scary.


It is, but the vast majority of this is what we call "all mouth and no trousers" and is for effect.

Dogs KNOW that they possess 42 lethal weapons each and will usually do all they can to avoid confrontation.

So there is usually a lot of noise, a lot of posturing which can look terrifying to owners who maybe have not seen their pet behave in this way before.

But it is normal and I think we sometimes expect more from our dogs than we do from ourselves, our families and children.

We do not expect couples or siblings to sail through life without the occasional spat and neither do we "like" everyone we work with, but we tend to adopt coping strategies most of the time to avoid huge bust ups!


----------



## leighhawkes89 (Jun 1, 2012)

smokeybear said:


> Still here............................ :lol:


LOL you two are like a married couple


----------



## Galadriel17 (Jan 22, 2012)

Ang2 said:


> Im not talking about my dog being aggressive. Im talking about being attacked by another dog.





Ang2 said:


> My dog being aggressive is not the issue. The one that could be aggressive is never off the lead, so he is not running free to attack another dog and is kept in check when we approach other dog walkers. If its someone we havent seen before, I will shout to them in advance to warn that he is aggressive to other dogs, incase their dog is likely to run up and jump on him.
> 
> However, this would not stop us from being attacked by an aggressive dog that was running free off the lead.


Actually, how your dog behaves matters quite a lot. If your dog is displaying agressive behaviour then I would think the chances of him being attacked are a good bit higher than if he were calm and paying no attention to another dog.


----------



## Guest (Jul 8, 2012)

Phoolf said:


> :lol: What a joke. Dogs being killed by others does happen in this country, we all know that so don't come up with ridiculous scenarios and pretend the likelihood is the same, how many peoples houses have been hit by planes in the UK in the past decade? And how many dogs have been killed by other dogs? Get back to me with some figures to show you're not being an idiot.


I think what she is saying is that once the attack has happened, and the dog is intending to kill, theres really not much you can do. Kind of like watching a plane fall from the sky towards your house - not much to do at that point ya know?

I dont mean to be morbid or paint my dog in a bad light, but here is an example. 
I often walk my dogs in the wee hours of the morning while its still dark. They are on lead, (mainly because *I* need the guidance ). One morning, as we were walking on a path in the woods, a rabbit tried to run across the path literally right under our feet. In less than a split second, my 80pound mutt dog who has experience hunting, grabbed and shook the rabbit, and it was all over. By the time I was able to get drop out of my mouth (which he did) the rabbit was dead. There was not a thing in the world I could have done to prevent that rabbit from being killed. Had that rabbit been a small dog, I hate to say it, but its very possible the scenario would have played out much the same. 
I would like to think that my dog would know in a split second that he had a dog not prey in his mouth, and I HAVE seen dogs (including this one) be able to make that split second distinction, but Im certainly not going to bank on it.

Basically what Im saying is that if a large, strong, powerful dog WANTS to do serious damage or kill something, its going to happen, and it can happen really fast, and before anyone has a chance to react. By the time you get your mace, pet corrector, hairspray, break stick, whatever out and in position to use it, its going to be all over. I know its a horrible thing to contemplate, but Im just trying to be realistic here.

The flip side of course is the massive number of attacks that happen that do NOT lead to life-threatening harm. I think thats something very positive and hopeful. Add in some common sense prevention strategies, and you and your dogs really are much safer than you think.


----------



## Guest (Jul 8, 2012)

Galadriel17 said:


> Actually, *how your dog behaves matters quite a lot*. If your dog is displaying agressive behaviour then I would think the chances of him being attacked are a good bit higher than if he were calm and paying no attention to another dog.


Exactly. And it doesnt even have to be that your dog is acting aggressively. Little dogs over excited yipping, bouncing and pulling on the lead are a big trigger for some prey driven dogs. Dogs moving in ways that dont look dog-like. Barking in a high pitched shrill way that mimics what prey sounds like.
Collies with hard eyes are a trigger for one of my dogs. (I know this and plan accordingly, but I sure wouldnt mind if the owners would clue in and prevent their dog from boring holes in to mine with their eyes.)

If you have a dog who is frequently getting attacked, it might be worth looking in to what your dog is doing to invite it.


----------



## ClaireandDaisy (Jul 4, 2010)

ouesi said:


> If you have a dog who is frequently getting attacked, it might be worth looking in to what your dog is doing to invite it.


I would also be recommending that the owner learns more about dog body language. I can pretty much tell a problem from a distance. Then I can take action to avoid it.


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

ClaireandDaisy said:


> I would also be recommending that the owner learns more about dog body language. I can pretty much tell a problem from a distance. Then I can take action to avoid it.


So all those owners whose dogs have been critically injured and killed - it was their fault was it?


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

Galadriel17 said:


> Actually, how your dog behaves matters quite a lot. If your dog is displaying agressive behaviour then I would think the chances of him being attacked are a good bit higher than if he were calm and paying no attention to another dog.


If my off lead dog was likely to attack another dog that was on a lead, for whatever reason - she wouldnt be allowed off the lead. So, my on lead dog shouldnt be at risk of being attacked either, whether he shows aggression or not.


----------



## Galadriel17 (Jan 22, 2012)

Ang2 said:


> If my off lead dog was likely to attack another dog that was on a lead, for whatever reason - she wouldnt be allowed off the lead. So, my on lead dog shouldnt be at risk of being attacked either, whether he shows aggression or not.


No he shouldn't, in a perfect world, but we don't live in a perfect world and the fact is, how your dog behaves can determine whether he gets attacked or not so you control what you can.


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

To say I am astounded by some of the replies to this thread, would be an understatement.

Some are in denial, firmly believing it will never happen to me, them or anyone else. Some think the non attacking dog needs more training in how to not be attacked! Some think those who were attacked should have known better. Some have more sympathy for the attacking dog than the one being attacked, going as far as comdemning any means of defence. And some just want to be controversially argumentative and annoying, just for the sake of it, without adding anything constructive to this debate.

And then there's PorkChop...... say no more!!!!!


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

Ang2 said:


> To say I am astounded by some of the replies to this thread, would be an understatement.
> 
> Some are in denial, firmly believing it will never happen to me, them or anyone else. *Some think the non attacking dog needs more training in how to not be attacked!* Some think those who were attacked should have known better. Some have more sympathy for the attacking dog than the one being attacked, going as far as comdemning any means of defence. And some just want to be controversially argumentative and annoying, just for the sake of it, without adding anything constructive to this debate.
> 
> And then there's PorkChop...... say no more!!!!!


I do see that perspective. Unfortunately my (large, entire male) dog has had a bit of a target on him it seems for the last few months although (touch wood) things seem to be calming. It is not his fault that he is an entire male, but has provoked a few attacks from dogs - all teeth, noise and slobber and some minor cuts - in particular a black lab we see fairly often. The consequence of this is that he has started to posture and eyeball black labs when they are walking towards us. I have to get him to sit or lie down and try and head off the labs. If one gets to him the meeting is stiff and 9 times out of 10 at present the lab will kick off - obviously my dog's body language - stiff, unsure - is sparking this off. He is fine meeting calmly and then offlead in a controlled manner.

Kilo doesn't aggress in terms of barking / lunging etc but we are working very hard to correct his behaviour as, although he isn't attacking dogs, he is causing them to attack him, if that makes sense.

ETA he does now react once the other dog has begun to aggress.


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

Phoolf said:


> In the past month I've seen 2 dog fights, both obviously broken up by owners, if they weren't around
> or [if they had done] nothing, *there would have been injuries*.


truthfully, Phoo - if the dog had INTENDED to harm the dog they were biting, there would be 
injuries; that there were not, isn't proof of how effective the human-interventions were, 
but proof that the dogs involved were scuffling, not having a "real fight".

Scuffles are often noisy, with barks growls, & snarls - they sound horrendous. 
Fights are often eerily silent, with little but panting & grunts accompanying the enormous efforts.

real fights result in punctures [one or more] of a depth at least half the length of the dog's 
canine-tooth or eye-tooth - the one who is BITING would be the dog whose tooth is measured.

*real fights* can also result in rips, especially if the humans try to pull a dog away while they are 
BITING - that vastly increases the severity of the injury.

*real fights* can have the worst-possible bites: Deep bruising & tissue sloughs from the wound, 
as the intense pressure destroys small blood-vessels & gangrene or circulatory collapse kills 
the muscle, connective, & skin tissues whose blood-supply has been cut off.

the worst bites are deep into muscle & require drains to allow fluid to escape & limit swelling as they 
slowly heal from within.


----------



## Guest (Jul 8, 2012)

Ang2 said:


> So all those owners whose dogs have been critically injured and killed - it was their fault was it?


No, no one is saying that. Its not about placing blame. Its about protecting your dog as best you can. And if you have an overexcited dog yipping and squeaking at the end of each bark, you may want to consider teaching said dog to settle so as to prevent him appearing as prey to another dog. 
If you have a collie that likes to eyeball other dogs, you may want to consider teaching said collie a solid watch me and keep an eye on him when in close quarters with other dogs (like vets waiting room etc.). 
IOW prevention. Taking control of what you do have control over. 
I cant prevent the rain no matter how many beads I shake and chants I recite, but I *can* build a roof.



Ang2 said:


> If my off lead dog was likely to attack another dog that was on a lead, *for whatever reason* - she wouldnt be allowed off the lead. So, my on lead dog shouldnt be at risk of being attacked either, whether he shows aggression or not.


If your on leash dog is showing aggression to my on-leash dog, you should be prepared for my on-leash dog to object to your on-leash dogs behavior  
Besides, until it happens, you really dont know what your dog is going to react to. ALL dogs are potential killers under the right (wrong?) circumstances. They are predators after all.



leashedForLife said:


> truthfully, Phoo - if the dog had INTENDED to harm the dog they were biting, there would be
> injuries; t*hat there were not, isn't proof of how effective the human-interventions were,
> but proof that the dogs involved were scuffling, not having a "real fight". *


This this this this!! If a dog wants to seriously hurt or kill another dog, severe damage is going to happen almost before the humans involved realize whats going on.
It seems like some folks in this thread are underestimating not only the self control most dogs show during a scuffle, but also the tremendous damage a dog can cause in mere seconds with just one bite.



Ang2 said:


> To say I am astounded by some of the replies to this thread, would be an understatement.
> 
> Some are in denial, firmly believing it will never happen to me, them or anyone else. Some think the non attacking dog needs more training in how to not be attacked! Some think those who were attacked should have known better. Some have more sympathy for the attacking dog than the one being attacked, going as far as comdemning any means of defence. And some just want to be controversially argumentative and annoying, just for the sake of it, without adding anything constructive to this debate.
> 
> And then there's PorkChop...... say no more!!!!!


Its not callousness that youre reading, its knowledge, experience, and being realistic.

Whos PorkChop? Did I miss something??


----------



## Guest (Jul 8, 2012)

ouesi said:


> Whos PorkChop? Did I miss something??


believe she is referring to smokeybear not that i think she will be bothered


----------



## Guest (Jul 8, 2012)

diablo said:


> believe she is referring to smokeybear not that i think she will be bothered


Thanks for clarifying diablo 

Regardless of whether it bothers her or not, if this forum isn't going to allow disrespectful discourse, then it shouldn't allow it period. Even if it doesn't bother the recipient. IMHO 

FWIW, I have found most of smokeybear's advice to be spot-on. Just because the delivery can be curt, maybe even acerbic, doesn't mean its not valuable information. Something to think about...

Sorry for the off topic post.


----------



## Guest (Jul 8, 2012)

ouesi said:


> Thanks for clarifying diablo
> 
> Regardless of whether it bothers her or not, if this forum isnt going to allow disrespectful discourse, then it shouldnt allow it period. Even if it doesnt bother the recipient. IMHO
> 
> ...


i do agree


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

ouesi said:


> Thanks for clarifying diablo
> 
> Regardless of whether it bothers her or not, if this forum isn't going to allow disrespectful discourse, then it shouldn't allow it period. Even if it doesn't bother the recipient. IMHO
> 
> ...


Sorry, but in this thread, I havent found any of his comments spot on, or in any way even relevant - rants about planes crashing into houses and flooding and bombs in gardens. Total tosh!

I didnt think the question in my original post was too difficult. If your dog was savagely attacked by another, how would you stop it?

Replies such as - train your dog how to avoid being attacked, and if you were as clairvoyant as me, you would have seen it coming and hot footed in the opposite direction - are bordering on stupidity and far from answer the question. These attacks are very real, and have actually happened to many people.

Im not talking about the events leading up to, or how it could have been prevented, or whose dog was what and where!

Your dog is being savagely attacked. He/she is screaming with terror and you fear your dog is going to have its throat ripped out in front of you. What can you do to get the other dog off?

Do I take it that the majority of you would just stand there and watch? If it is, then just say so!


----------



## Guest (Jul 9, 2012)

Just returned. One idea mentioned and allowed through to the keeper, can be a good one if in the right circumstances. If the aggressor is a heavy set dog, and your dog is something like a greyhound, and you are in fields, to let go, is great. DO try to unclip the lead, rather than let go, or the lead could catch on a tree branch, or gate latch. I have actually used this and seen it used, and can still remember screaming RUN! RUN! RUN! to a dog, popeyed and frozen, in the same shock as me. Usually the heavy dog is outdistanced, and tired before it can attack. However, on city streets, your escaping dog could run onto roads, etc, or be cornered AND it will happen too far away from you for you to defend.

AGAIN, truly, blocking the nose does NOT prevent breathing. I'll explain. Take an apple, be the aggressive dog, jaws open, take a huge bite out of your enemy. Your mouth is taught and you are breathing through your nose. HOWEVER, a dog has loose skin, and compressible flesh. When the attacking dog takes the bite, the teeth grip at the outer reaches, BUT the flesh compresses, the skin is quite loose, comparitively, and dog lips aren't tight across the teeth and gums. They are more like those ruffle things that disguise bed bases. BELIEVE ME. I am speaking from experience. You could wait 10 minutes, with a slavering dog locked on to your dog. You will still be waiting 20 mins later, and I'm trying to tell you, altho it sounds a possibility, it doesn't work.

Yes, to whomever asked, I have done a lot of rescue work. I have also been in a suburban street, and seen it happen with dogs coming out of nowhere, and no one round. and I just had to deal with a dog that was going to kill.

The patronisingly poisonous remarks are something one gets used to from this poster. I feel I owe apologies to men of the world, as I haven't come across that attitude in a female before. THAT has really shocked me. 

First I am told I couldn't do it, then when I describe one actual encounter, I'm given the sniffy, aren't you the Superhero in your own head, remark. It bored me to recount it. I did it to tell those genuinely asking what they CAN do, and also how it feels. To hold a dangerous dog still and be so close to the slavering face of a dog that in that moment, wants to kill and tear... It is an experience that leaves you shaking and breathless. Often, once you have the aggressor controlled, you have to then rush the other dog to the vet, check for blood, anything needing to be dealt with, before the drive. I can only say that the adrenalin shoots again. Some don't cope, some do. All I can say, is if you can't cope, get out of the way, do what you are told, by the person who IS acting.

I have a lot to do this morning, but I hope I have answered a few questions from people who want to try to walk possible actions over in their heads. THAT can really help you to act sensibly, in a panic. Think through the possible things to happen, and the steps you feel you can take. Small dog/large dog. Even if you feel you can't step in, talk yourself through what you know you can do, so you don't stand in shock for 5 minutes.

The military use this all the time. Go through the steps, walk through it in your head, challenge yourself with a different idea, walk it through, refine it. I truly hope you never have that moment of truth, The moment to choose to act or stay frozen, and the costs of doing EITHER. To do nothing also has a cost. A VC winner does not set out to win a VC. They act when they see a desperate need, and they feel they CAN act, often in the moment when others, possibly equally or more brave, are momentarily frozen in shock, and debating what to do. Some people feel their power in shuffling paper and quoting bylaws and regulations. Nothing is acceptable unless there is a by the book tick off of someone's list. Nothing is original, astounding thought. Others DO, soar, achieve or crash and burn and sometimes both.

I have to go. Would like to address the choke/harder bite, I think ouesi brought up, but may forget. If anyone wants to hear, give me a pm, if I forget. It is a point and I don't dispute it. Clearly, it was well observed, in the middle of a crisis, but I would like to address it.

I'm not interested in impressing anyone here. I'll never meet anyone, have no hopes of making money from anyone, but I responded early, if you check, because someone was trying to comprehend what they might be confronted with, because they love their dog. I didn't deal with lessening the likelihood, as that wasn't the question. I may have addressed it later. I have to go.


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

Househens, thank you. You are one of the few that have actually answered the question without digressing into lessening the likelihood.

Unfortunately, I am 5ft 3" and 8 stone. I doubt I would be able to successfully tackle a large vicious dog by strength alone. Thats what worries me.


----------



## Guest (Jul 9, 2012)

Ang2 said:


> I didnt think the question in my original post was too difficult. If your dog was savagely attacked by another, how would you stop it?


Okay see, this is what youre not getting. If your dog was being truly savagely attacked, there is really not much you could do. Odds are its going to happen lightning fast and be over before you have time to even process what is happening.



Ang2 said:


> Replies such as - train your dog how to avoid being attacked, and if you were as clairvoyant as me, you would have seen it coming and hot footed in the opposite direction - are bordering on stupidity and far from answer the question. These attacks are very real, and have actually happened to many people.


But it is good advice. Most people have NO clue how obnoxious their dogs are and how much their own dogs contribute to how other dogs respond to them.

If you ever get a chance, go to a dog show and watch how people handle their dogs. Go to a show and watch a ring full of intact males in close quarters not fighting. Watch a ring full of dogs who dont know each other in a stay mere feet apart from each other while their owners go out of sight. Watching the pros do it might open your eyes a bit to what each of us can do to ensure our dogs behavior doesnt invite bad behavior from other dogs. Thats not placing blame, thats just being smart.



Ang2 said:


> Im not talking about the events leading up to, or how it could have been prevented, or whose dog was what and where!


 Prevention IS the most effective policy though. Once the dog has decided to use teeth with purpose, youre really not going to be able to do much but pick up the pieces.



Ang2 said:


> Your dog is being savagely attacked. He/she is screaming with terror and you fear your dog is going to have its throat ripped out in front of you. What can you do to get the other dog off?


Seriously? Maybe lay off the Steven King movies? 
Most dogs are not savages looking for their next victim.



Ang2 said:


> Do I take it that the majority of you would just stand there and watch? If it is, then just say so!


Yes. Not intentionally, but because it would be over before you have a chance to react. IF the dog was intending to hurt/maim/kill. 
If the dog is *not* intending to hurt/maim/kill, just really angry, then do your best big bad primate impersonation, scream and yell and get ready to grab the dogs when they look at you like you have lost your mind.


----------



## Malmum (Aug 1, 2010)

I car palm sized bottle of McKenzies smelling salts in my pocket with my poo bags. It's ammonia in a tiny bottle and very very powerful. You can buy it from the chemist and I hope if wafted at the approaching dog it will persuade it to bug off and if I ever have a 'latch on' it will go directly under the attacking dogs nose. The dog would have to be pretty tough not to get it's head knocked off with that stuff!


----------



## Howl (Apr 10, 2012)

> Do I take it that the majority of you would just stand there and watch? If it is, then just say so!


If I was on a walk probably. Thank you for the above post. You are correct in that if you know what to do you act. I know how I act in a medical emergency I just go through what I know but dog attack I was just stunned. It is true doing nothing for 5 mins helps no one. 
I don't carry things around with me. If the situation I was in had got worse and the dog hadn't let go I would probably have hit it on the nose hard or twisted it's collar and I can honestly say it isn't in my nature I have never hit an animal. It was a big dog short of trying to get help there was little I think anyone could have done. 
I agree above letting the dog go, it's something you see alot of advice about in relation to cows charging. In my situation letting her off lead would probably have worked she would have been much faster as is fast and the other dog was overweight. A risk but one I probably should have taken. 
I agree prevention is better but so much is learnt from experience and watching dogs, their little tells. A few people have suggested look at body language it really is important to react early to prevent problems but again not going to help if a dog runs up off lead. 
One thing that might work depending on how the other dog is behaving is like the lady that interrupted looters in the riots. Get brave use your voice short sharp assertive. It could work. Some dogs are immune to being shouted at though and some are just seeing red. 
Talk to local dog owners they will often tell you who to watch out for. The dog that went for mine, I learnt later almost never leaves the garden. Same goes if your dog was attacked let other dog walkers know. 
Like you say a dog can always come out of nowhere or break it's lead. Dogs can catch you off guard too I know of two who go from play to attack without warning which means once you know you avoid. 
The owners I worry about are those who think it's funny that their dog is aggressive, egg it on and appear to want to approach people and talk about how funny it is, sometimes with their dogs on flexis ?!


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

Ouesi, you really need to read more newpapers or even this forum. Dog attacks are very real, and on the 'up' in the UK. Some members have posted their experiences on this very thread. Why do you keep saying it doesnt happen?

I dont want to be complacent and end up being caught off guard! It may never happen to me, but I would like to be prepared with the best advice if it does.


----------



## catz4m8z (Aug 27, 2008)

This kind of scenario really worries me. I know that if my dogs ever met a truly aggressive dog then it would take just one bite (unless it was another tiny toy breed!) and my dogs would be dead. I doubt I could do anything to stop it and it doesnt help that 2 of mine would run away screaming from an aggressive dog which might make it worse.
I have just tried to lesson the risk by trying to socialize mine as well as I could. Now I trust them to know when a dog is going to be too much for them or abit dodgy temperment wise. I also stick to popular walking areas at popular times. You usually find that people with truly aggressive dogs wont try and walk them where they are likely to encounter a ton of other dogs. 
Although if I had access to my own field or maasive garden I would happily just road walk mine and not bother to mix with other dogs!!


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

A real attack isn't necessarily over before you can react, I had more than enough time to intervene with Rupe and his attacker. Most likely coz they were pretty evenly matched and neither was willing to back down. Had Rupert been a small dog though the outcome would likely have been very different. And I'm afraid that yeah, I'd do whatever I could if the situation ever arose again.

However, I do agree with all those saying prevention is the key. It's far, far better simply not to get in the situation in the first place and to do everything you can to ensure your dog isn't likely to trigger aggressive behaviour from other dogs. Rupert triggered aggressive behaviour with his own behaviuor, even usually friendly dogs were often aggressive towards him.


----------



## Guest (Jul 9, 2012)

Ang2 said:


> Ouesi, you really need to read more newpapers or even this forum. Dog attacks are very real, and on the 'up' in the UK. Some members have posted their experiences on this very thread. Why do you keep saying it doesnt happen?


Please point me to where I have said it doesn't happen. I haven't said that once. I have repeatedly said, it would likely happen so fast you would not have a chance to do anything even if you wanted to. 
I'm beginning to feel you and I aren't even reading the same thread.  

I think you are greatly underestimating dogs if you think you can stop one intent on doing harm. 60 pound dogs who know what they're doing can floor full grown men even though the guys are expecting the hit. Dogs are quicker than us, more agile than us, stronger than us, and have better teeth.

If you don't want to be caught off guard, read back through this thread and heed the very excellent advice you have been given about PREVENTING the attack from happening to begin with. In other words, pay attention to your surroundings, pay attention to your dog, pay attention to other dogs, pay attention to body language, pay attention to how much control other owners appear to have or not have... Pay attention.


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

ouesi said:


> Please point me to where I have said it doesnt happen. I havent said that once. I have repeatedly said, it would likely happen so fast you would not have a chance to do anything even if you wanted to.
> Im beginning to feel you and I arent even reading the same thread.
> 
> I think you are greatly underestimating dogs if you think you can stop one intent on doing harm. 60 pound dogs who know what theyre doing can floor full grown men even though the guys are expecting the hit. Dogs are quicker than us, more agile than us, stronger than us, and have better teeth.
> ...


I dont think you are reading the same thread either LOL. Im not asking how to prevent it. I recently avoided my usual route where two young lads had 6 large dogs that looked like dobermans and rotties running loose. Another time a staffie came running up to us from out of nowhere with no owner in sight. That was worrying but fortunately, he turned out to be friendly.

What Im asking is that if, despite all attempts to not invite an attack, you are taken by surprise and find - through no fault of your own - that your dog is being attacked.

So far, the smelling salts, suggested by another member, is the only probable answer for me.


----------



## catz4m8z (Aug 27, 2008)

I wonder wether something like a rape alarm or air horn might have some effect? Dogs have very sensitive hearing and one of those right next to its ear might interrupt it!


----------



## Guest (Jul 9, 2012)

Ang2 said:


> I dont think you are reading the same thread either LOL. Im not asking how to prevent it. I recently avoided my usual route where two young lads had 6 large dogs that looked like dobermans and rotties running loose. Another time a staffie came running up to us from out of nowhere with no owner in sight. That was worrying but fortunately, he turned out to be friendly.
> 
> What Im asking is that if, despite all attempts to not invite an attack, you are taken by surprise and find - through no fault of your own - that your dog is being attacked.
> 
> So far, the smelling salts, suggested by another member, is the only probable answer for me.


Well I give up then. 
If after everything you have read on this thread, you still think youre going to get two fighting dogs to hold still long enough for you to get to the head, shove smelling salts under the aggressors nose, and you think this is even going to have some sort of significant effect, then youre just not going to get it.


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

ouesi said:


> Well I give up then.
> If after everything you have read on this thread, you still think youre going to get two fighting dogs to hold still long enough for you to get to the head, shove smelling salts under the aggressors nose, and you think this is even going to have some sort of significant effect, then youre just not going to get it.


Just because you cant think of anything, doesnt mean that nobody else can! And I thought it would be interesting to hear from others about how they dealt with such an incident.

Anyway, I think I've found the solution:

Bite Back

This is made from all natural oils and totally safe, causing no harm to the dog.


----------



## terencesmum (Jul 30, 2011)

Ang2 said:


> Just because you cant think of anything, doesnt mean that nobody else can! And I thought it would be interesting to hear from others about how they dealt with such an incident.
> 
> Anyway, I think I've found the solution:
> 
> ...


I looked on the website and it doesn't say anywhere what exactly is in it. How do you know it's safe to use? Just because the company flogging it claims it's safe does not actually mean it's true.


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

Ang2 said:


> Dog attacks [of other dogs] are very real, and [occurring more-often] in the UK.


who says that UK-dogs attack other dogs more-frequently than in the past? 
where are the statistics to prove that, & who collected them? :skep:

if they're the same folks spouting manure about the EPIDEMIC OF DOG-BITES to humans, 
they're nothing but rabble-rousing headline salesmen - it's pure cr*p, as there are MORE dogs 
in MORE homes, but far-fewer bites than previously. The primary change has been the size of dogs - 
the average dog in urban settings was once under-20 to 30#, now folks have larger dogs.

simply expressed, bigger dog = bigger bite - but in sheer numbers, it was more common to be bitten 
in the 1960s than it is today, despite a massive increase in the number of pet dogs in homes. 
Partly that's due to decreased tolerance - in the 60s folks generally figured that dogs bit, 
& usually that the bitee had done something to cause the dog to bite. Today, we don't tolerate 
dogs who bite, even with good cause - society is more litigious & less accepting.


----------



## moonviolet (Aug 11, 2011)

terencesmum said:


> I looked on the website and it doesn't say anywhere what exactly is in it. How do you know it's safe to use? Just because the company flogging it claims it's safe does not actually mean it's true.


I found a few things in the FAQ's concerning , Using it at 3-5 metres to create a haze, which will disorientate and distracted, I'm a damn sight more likely to lash out if i'm having something sprayed at me that disorientates,

What happens if it's sprayed closer than the advised range? could it be damaging then? even as advised it takes 10-20 mins for the dog to recover.

These are the human measures for contact with the product.Bite Back

_"What are the first aid measures for Bite Back products?

Bite Back is formulated with natural oils and therefore poses a low risk to both humans and dogs. However, like all natural oils, exposure may have adverse effects in certain circumstances and if the product is not used correctly. In these circumstances, the first aid measures are as follows;

Inhalation: Move into fresh air and keep at rest. Get medical attention if any discomfort continues.

Ingestion: Immediately rinse mouth and provide fresh air. DO NOT induce vomiting. Get medical attention immediately.

Skin contact: Remove contaminated clothing. Wash skin thoroughly with soap and water. Get medical attention if any discomfort continues.

Eye contact: Immediately flush with plenty of water for up to 15 minutes. Remove any contact lenses and open eyes wide apart. Get medical attention promptly if symptoms occur after washing."_

I'd be concerned about being unable to get my dog to the vets if i used it the advised " haze" style and it blew into my face. I'm not sure i'd have the presence of mind to check the wind direction. 
----------------------

If people begin routinely carrying these things I can see people who are unable to read body language spraying dogs left right and centre and while i dont' approve of rude friendly dogs charging up to others, and am well aware of the damaged they can do, I am damn sure I don't approve of them being sprayed with this sort of stuff.


----------



## Guest (Jul 9, 2012)

Ang2 said:


> Just because you cant think of anything, doesnt mean that nobody else can! And I thought it would be interesting to hear from others about how they dealt with such an incident.
> 
> Anyway, I think I've found the solution:
> 
> ...


Okay, lets play out a scenario shall we?


Ang2 said:


> I have two dogs. One is a large breed and although great with people, he is aggressive to other dogs until he knows them. For this reason, he is not let off the lead NEVER! My other dog is just a joy to walk. She is obedient and friendly to all she meets. She hasnt got an aggressive bone in her and bounds up to all dogs to say 'hello'.


So there you are Ang, out strolling with your puppers, having a lovely walk. Your friendly dog bounds up to another dog who out of the clear blue morphs in to Cujo and begins to savagely attack her. 
At this point, you now have to:
a) reach your dog who has bounded away from you to go meet this dog,
b) keep your aggressive dog under enough control that you can reach you other dog without having him join in to the melee, 
c) while still maintaing control of your other dog, reach in to your purse, pocket, backpack and get this can of spray,
d) remove the safety features that prevent it from spraying in your backpack, (remember one of your hands at least will be heavily involved in maintaining control of your other dog),
e) aim it at the dog and hope the wind is blowing in your favor,
f) re-aim because now the dogs have moved,
g) re-aim again because your aggressive dog jerked you out of reach, 
e) spray the dog and hope it has an effect.

In the meantime the whole thing is over either because it wasnt a true attack and the aggressor is done making his point, or it was a true attack and your dog is shredded up anyway.

NOW do you see why so many of us are preaching prevention???


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

Im talking about as a last resort (life or death) - not a deterrant! I am not even remotely suggesting it should be used routinely.


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

moonviolet said:


> _"What are the first aid measures for Bite Back products?
> 
> Bite Back is formulated with natural oils and therefore poses a low risk to both humans and dogs.
> However, like all natural oils, exposure may have adverse effects in certain circumstances
> ...


agreed!  That scares the tar outta me - it sounds as tho it triggers respiratory distress, 
as well as blinding the victim with eye-irritation, & the person spraying is as likely to get a lungful 
or a double eyeful as any of the dogs - that's precisely the problem with pepper-spray [capsicum], 
ANYbody at the scene can be seriously affected, & DoG help U if U're asthmatic or allergic.

If U whip out yer trusty spray as soon as a dog runs up to Ur dog, there's every chance U'd make 
the encounter worse, not 'cut it short', & U could end up in the hospital Urself - with Ur dog who knows where, 
after the melee. I wouldn't take that stuff as a gift!

i still rely on my trusty long-ferrule umbrella, as ugly as sin but an effective visual barrier, 
with a POINT to poke especially persistent dogs.


----------



## goodvic2 (Nov 23, 2008)

SpringerHusky said:


> I carry a pet corrector as a deterrent for handbag fights.
> 
> Someone on here carries a small fire extinguisher, which would work well but would be quite heavy to lug around.


Unfortunately it kept breaking my rucksacks and eventually fell on the floor and broke = no more fire extinguisher.

Now i carry water and A break stick.


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

ouesi said:


> Okay, lets play out a scenario shall we?
> 
> So there you are Ang, out strolling with your puppers, having a lovely walk. Your friendly dog bounds up to another dog who out of the clear blue morphs in to Cujo and begins to savagely attack her.
> At this point, you now have to:
> ...


You cant preach preventon to me, because I am always vigilant and cautious on my walks.

Most of you think there is no answer, and that you might as well just spark up a cigarette and take a ringside seat!

I worry about the safety of my dogs, and after all I've read, I think its stupid that anyone would think it would never happen to them.


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

goodvic2 said:


> Unfortunately it kept breaking my rucksacks and eventually fell on the floor and broke = no more fire extinguisher.
> 
> Now i carry water and A break stick.


Now is that pure bottled water? I would hate to think that you are using contaminated tap water on some poor unsuspecting vicious dog!


----------



## Guest (Jul 9, 2012)

goodvic2 said:


> Unfortunately it kept breaking my rucksacks and eventually fell on the floor and broke = no more fire extinguisher.
> 
> Now i carry water and A break stick.


Quick tip - Break sticks are considered dog fighting paraphernalia and are illegal in many places. A plastic tent stake works just as well.

The only reason I hesitate to mention break sticks is that you have to know how to use one, and you definitely need to be prepared for the dog to latch right back on to whatever is available (including you) as soon as you get him to let go. Its certainly not a one man job. 
Also, break sticks only work for a certain kind of fight. A lot of fights are fast moving with lots of shallow biting and tearing and not much prolonged gripping.


----------



## terencesmum (Jul 30, 2011)

Ang2 said:


> Now is that pure bottled water? I would hate to think that you are using contaminated tap water on some poor unsuspecting vicious dog!


It saddens me that you feel it is necessary to ridicule other people's genuine concern about the safety of other dogs when you seriously consider spraying them with an effectively unknown chemical. How would you feel if I pepper-sprayed your dog? :nonod:


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

ouesi said:


> Quick tip - Break sticks are considered dog fighting paraphernalia and are illegal in many places. A plastic tent stake works just as well.
> 
> The only reason I hesitate to mention break sticks is that you have to know how to use one, and you definitely need to be prepared for the dog to latch right back on to whatever is available (including you) as soon as you get him to let go. Its certainly not a one man job.
> Also, break sticks only work for a certain kind of fight. A lot of fights are fast moving with lots of shallow biting and tearing and not much prolonged gripping.


My OH always carries a drum stick with him on walks so if theres an attack he can hopefully put it through the other dogs collar and turn it so break off the air supply. But to be honest unless it was an extremely large dog I'm confident in his ability to break it up anyway, he's a pretty big bloke, even if he did get injured he'd still break it up. Can't say the same for me though of course, which is part of the reason why I always ask him to walk with me in new places etc.


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

Ang2 said:


> Most of you think there is no answer, & that you might as well just spark up a cigarette & take a ringside seat!
> 
> ...after all I've read, I think it's stupid that anyone would think it would never happen to them.


No, there isn't ONE answer - & by and large, by the time we humans react, it's either all over 
[with or w/o damage to any dogs], or it's a full-on serious fight, in which case, there's damn little 
that the average pet-owner can do, frankly; Even highly-experienced dog handlers GET HURT 
if they try to separate fighting dogs: inserting any human body-part means there's a very good chance 
that U will receive a bad, full-force bite - NOT an inhibited bite; muscle & tendon can be severed, 
severe tissue-damage is common, nerve damage which may affect Ur ability to work, & so on.

Why do U persist in thinking that a dog-attack is somehow inevitable? 
How many of the 1,000s of PF-uk members have had their dog bitten by another dog, 
let alone assaulted full-on with multiple bites & possibly drains &/ or stitches? 
i doubt very much that it's one in 1,000 members.

YOUR DOG - the dog-reactive one on leash - is something U can change: get some good help 
in the form of B-mod for the aggro / reactive behavior, which will vastly cut the odds that Ur dogs 
will be assaulted; as noted before, the dog being attacked can also be an instigator, even if s/he 
is on a leash at the time - hard stares, hackles, tail jacked-up or flagging stiffly, etc, all that 
posturing can trigger a normally non-reactive dog to approach, Ur dog escalates the threats, 
& a fight starts.


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

ouesi said:


> ...Break sticks are considered dog fighting paraphernalia and are illegal in many places.
> [CUT]
> Also, break sticks only work for a certain kind of fight. A lot of fights are fast moving, with lots of shallow
> biting & tearing, and not much prolonged gripping.


yup - Only bully-breeds generally speaking, engage in prolonged grips, & collies or Nordic breeds 
are both notorious types for being knife-fighters: Jump in, slash, jump out. A break-stick is useless, 
in that sort of encounter.


----------



## goodvic2 (Nov 23, 2008)

ouesi said:


> Quick tip - Break sticks are considered dog fighting paraphernalia and are illegal in many places. A plastic tent stake works just as well.
> 
> The only reason I hesitate to mention break sticks is that you have to know how to use one, and you definitely need to be prepared for the dog to latch right back on to whatever is available (including you) as soon as you get him to let go. Its certainly not a one man job.
> Also, break sticks only work for a certain kind of fight. A lot of fights are fast moving with lots of shallow biting and tearing and not much prolonged gripping.


I deal mainly with bull breeds and their way of fighting is not letting go.

In an ideal world we wouldn't need to consider this subject but I have been unfortunate enough to witness it.

I think in my particular case my dedication to my rescue I volunteer for and my own rescue dogs would be enough to convince a judge that I was not into dog fighting . But point taken, it is fighting equipment ...


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

terencesmum said:


> It saddens me that you feel it is necessary to ridicule other people's genuine concern about the safety of other dogs when you seriously consider spraying them with an effectively unknown chemical. How would you feel if I pepper-sprayed your dog? :nonod:


It also saddens me, that nobody is taking this seriously, and that there is more concern for the welfare of a dog that is ripping yours apart.

Some have given accounts on how they had to wade in kicking and punching an attacking dog. Im trying to find better way (if there is one) to break up a fight without causing injury to either dog.

Why accuse me of using 'an unknown chemical' or insuate (as some have) that I would just want to run out and spray every dog I see. The site says "natural oils" and says "safe" and claims is used by councils and organisations.

And if MY dog was viciously attacking another dog to the point it was going to cause serious injury, I would fully expect the owner to use whatever force necessary to save their dog. If my dog was capable of this, she wouldnt be off lead in the first place. Unfortunately, not all owners are responsible.

Debate is fine, but there is no need to make insinuations and accuasations.

Oh, and my comment was not meant to ridicule, but more a light hearted quip.


----------



## Guest (Jul 9, 2012)

leashedForLife said:


> yup - Only bully-breeds generally speaking, engage in prolonged grips, & collies or Nordic breeds
> are both notorious types for being *knife-fighters*: Jump in, slash, jump out. A break-stick is useless,
> in that sort of encounter.


LOL! Quite an apt description.


----------



## Guest (Jul 9, 2012)

goodvic2 said:


> I deal mainly with bull breeds and their way of fighting is not letting go.
> 
> In an ideal world we wouldn't need to consider this subject but I have been unfortunate enough to witness it.
> 
> I think in my particular case my dedication to my rescue I volunteer for and my own rescue dogs would be enough to convince a judge that I was not into dog fighting . But point taken, it is fighting equipment ...


Honestly I wish more people who own bully breeds would keep break sticks handy and know how to use them.


----------



## terencesmum (Jul 30, 2011)

Ang2 said:


> It also saddens me, that nobody is taking this seriously, and that there is more concern for the welfare of a dog that is ripping yours apart.
> 
> Some have given accounts on how they had to wade in kicking and punching an attacking dog. Im trying to find better way (if there is one) to break up a fight without causing injury to either dog.
> 
> ...


I can understand your original question and it also worries me what would happen if my own dog ever got attacked.
BUT if you were to use said product, you would be using an unknown chemical since it states nowhere on the site what it is. Natural does not equal nice. Plague, Ebola, small pox are all natural but not nice.


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

Ang2 said:


> It also saddens me, that nobody is taking this seriously, and that there is more concern for the welfare of a dog that is ripping yours apart.
> 
> Some have given accounts on how they had to wade in kicking and punching an attacking dog. Im trying to find better way (if there is one) to break up a fight without causing injury to either dog.
> 
> ...


All dogs are capable of it. That is why I try to manage situations as best I can. I have (touch wood massively!) only ever had Kilo involved in handbags and scuffles which have been easily sorted. I am concentrating on him being less sensitive to dogs who aggress at him or eyeball him and concentrating on not allowing him to posture and eyeball in turn - if you really work on your lead - reactive dog then hopefully the chances of anything happening will be lessened.

I have just got back from the park where a chi raced to the end of it's flexi snapping and snarling. Kilo didn't react by barking / lunging etc which is good, but was then up on his toes, very vigilant and 'keyed up' for the next few minutes which does alter his posture and signals that he sends out to other dogs. I know this and just took him a quiet way to sniff about and settle down until he was relaxed again. If your lead reactive dog gets others 'keyed up' then I would imagine the chances of something happening are greater than if you could reduce their reactivity if that makes any sense.


----------



## moonviolet (Aug 11, 2011)

Ang2 said:


> It also saddens me, that nobody is taking this seriously, and that there is more concern for the welfare of a dog that is ripping yours apart.
> 
> Some have given accounts on how they had to wade in kicking and punching an attacking dog. Im trying to find better way (if there is one) to break up a fight without causing injury to either dog.
> 
> ...


I certainly did not accuse you of wanting to run out and spray every dog you see. I said if carrying these sprays became commonplace it could lead those who do not understand dog's body language doing so. I was not assuming for one momnet you were one of those people. Please do not misinterpret what I have said.

My dog was attacked(freak set of circumstances) and the most important thing for me and her was getting her promptly to the vet for treatment and that is why i would never advocate anything that could prevent the ability to do so.


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

terencesmum said:


> I can understand your original question and it also worries me what would happen if my own dog ever got attacked.
> BUT if you were to use said product, you would be using an unknown chemical since it states nowhere on the site what it is. Natural does not equal nice. Plague, Ebola, small pox are all natural but not nice.


Thank you. Well thats that idea out of the window.

I know Im over worrying, but after almost bumping into those two young lads with 6 rotties/dobermans off lead and running amock, its made me worry. Im very nervous on my walks now.


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

moonviolet said:


> I certainly did not accuse you of wanting to run out and spray every dog you see. I said if carrying these sprays became commonplace it could lead those who do not understand dog's body language doing so. I was not assuming for one momnet you were one of those people. Please do not misinterpret what I have said.
> 
> My dog was attacked and the most important thing for me and her was gettign her promplty to the vet for treatment and that is why i would never advocate anything that could prevent the ability to do so.


Where did I say 'you' had accused me?


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

Ang2 said:


> Thank you. Well thats that idea out of the window.
> 
> I know Im over worrying, but after almost bumping into those two young lads with 6 rotties/dobermans off lead and running amock, its made me worry. Im very nervous on my walks now.


I think we all worry (I do) - easier said than done, but really try not to be nervous. Whenever I get nervous it makes Kilo very on edge, sometimes I really can't help it but do try and consciously calm myself down .


----------



## terencesmum (Jul 30, 2011)

Ang2 said:


> Thank you. Well thats that idea out of the window.
> 
> I know Im over worrying, but after almost bumping into those two young lads with 6 rotties/dobermans off lead and running amock, its made me worry. Im very nervous on my walks now.


As I said, I can totally sympathise with that. And I'll be honest, if there was a full blown fight, I don't think I could stop it. Everything we have encountered as always been very much handbags at dawn and was over quickly. Let's hope I never have to find out what it takes to seperate a proper fight.


----------



## moonviolet (Aug 11, 2011)

Ang2 said:


> Where did I say 'you' had accused me?


I'm not accusing you and, you aren't accusing me of accusing you glad we cleared that up.


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

i've written about this before, but that's no reason not to repeat it - 

a buddy of mine is involved in Chessie rescue, & she's a very experienced, dog-savvy handler.
She's also inclined to take chances that i never would - BECAUSE she's knowledgeable & savvy, 
PLUS she's rarely had anything terrible happen, due to her taking risks. This time, she did - 

a new rescue was being fostered in her home, since all the other fosters were full-up. 
The new dog was a spayed F, in good condition & UTD on vax, plus at 2.5-YO she was well-trained - 
she would heel off-leash. My friend had lived with this dog for less than a week, but she got sloppy; 
IMO unforgivably complacent, but these things do happen. She was walking to her neighbor's house 
with the Chessie at heel beside her, the dog left her side, ran 10 or so feet, yanked a sunbathing 
elderly cat off the windowsill, SHOOK the cat & snapped her neck, & came back to heel - 
without a drop of blood spilled, & not even breathing hard. 

imagine having to explain to the neighbor who has invited U for coffee, that the dog beside U has 
just killed Ur 16-YO housecat on her own property. :nonod: That was a hard conversation to begin, 
let alone to finish - & the poor cat had done nothing to trigger a chase, either. It was literally over 
before my friend even knew what the dog was doing, let alone could react to stop it.


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

Im constantly working on my on lead dog. I rescued him at a very old age and it really is hard to teach an old dog new tricks. He is getting slightly better but I doubt he will ever be able to be let off lead.


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

leashedForLife said:


> i've written about this before, but that's no reason not to repeat it -
> 
> a buddy of mine is involved in Chessie rescue, & she's a very experienced, dog-savvy handler.
> She's also inclined to take chances that i never would - BECAUSE she's knowledgeable & savvy,
> ...


Oh, thats terribly sad! Im so glad my dogs are at least cat friendly.


----------



## Galadriel17 (Jan 22, 2012)

Ang, since you want someone to tell you a way of breaking up a dog fight so much then maybe take a look at this - How to Break Up a Dog Fight - I don't agree with many of this guy's training methods but the way he describes breaking up a dog fight seems to be the most commonly accepted method although I don't know if it does work as thankfully I've not been in a situation where I've had to break up a real fight.

There are also lots of pictures of what can happen if you get involved in breaking up a dog fight here - Emails about Dog Bites and Dog Attacks - some of which are pretty horrific so maybe you can understand why lots of people have been saying the best way is to learn how to prevent an attack from happening in the first place.


----------



## Jobeth (May 23, 2010)

My dog the victim of a 'mugging' by an off lead dog. I didnt expect it as the owner had stopped to chat (my mistake for thinking that meant the dog must be fine) and then 5 minutes later it suddenly ran back down the hill for him. It was horrible listening to him scream as he was thrown around. I panicked and the moment I got the chance I picked my dog up. If it had of been a full blown attack due to his size he'd likely have been dead before I could have got out any of the deterrents suggested.
Whilst I'm aware of unknown dogs I'm not going to spend time worrying that either dog is going to be ripped apart (my puppy is a small yorkie so it is more at risk) as I'd be a nervous wreck and I bet my dogs would be too as they pick up your emotions.
I really hope nothing ever happens to your dogs, but chances are that the worst that could happen is they need vet treatment. It is extremely unlikely (although not impossible) that they will be killed by another dog.


----------



## Howl (Apr 10, 2012)

One thing I have noticed about a lot of peoples comments especially one made by Dogless awhile ago about talking to a lady and trying to get away from the conversation and her dog? 
We are animals. We want to meet/approach people amicably, we don't want to trigger anger or confrontation.
Just today my neighbours, hyper large young dog was doing rings around him. He was stood outside my house letting his dog bark at D through the window :frown2:. 
I have just moved to a new area. I don't want to feel uncomfortable or have arguments or read the riot act with people I have only just met so against my better judgement I smile and approach. 
It is stupid my dog an upset rescue who is just getting better with approaching dogs after 6 months of training. I chat to the guy roll my eyes at my poor dog for barking and say oh yeh my other dog was a bit giddey at that age. 
What I should have done was told him where to get off, winding my dog up and walked away from him and his dog, extend my walk and re-approach the house when he was gone. 
Not always but sometimes you can prevent dog fights by putting your dog before how you think you might appear, especially if you have a rescue who is learning new behaviours. Don't get me wrong I am accusing no one specifically just something especially the sociable among of us need to watch out for. 
I saw used once in a training class when a dog was starting to fixate and jesturing at another dog the trainer used a metal chain. He picked it out of his box and threw it hard on the ground away from the situation. It was a sports hall so the noise echoed and it was loud made the dog jump. I don't know if there is an equivalent, caps? The bottle of coins trick? Suppose you run the risk of aggravating the situation.


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

Howl said:


> One thing I have noticed about a lot of peoples comments especially one made by Dogless awhile ago about talking to a lady and trying to get away from the conversation and her dog?
> We are animals. We want to meet/approach people amicably, we don't want to trigger anger or confrontation.
> Just today my neighbours, hyper large young dog was doing rings around him. He was stood outside my house letting his dog bark at D through the window :frown2:.
> I have just moved to a new area. I don't want to feel uncomfortable or have arguments or read the riot act with people I have only just met so against my better judgement I smile and approach.
> ...


I'm wondering what that was now; am I your antisocial owner example? .


----------



## charlearose (Sep 18, 2011)

i have several dogue de bordeauxs & bull mastiffs the biggest one is just under 80killos and 30 inches to his back @18months 


both the older ddbs are fine to walk well socialised do all commands however what we have learnt is that certain things will trigger them off its rarely them as i know my dogs and their body language I'm not saying that they are perfect .... 

things that set them off are 
dogs that stare, at them or are excited or barking muzzled dogs

owners that really should be on the lead and fluff around getting hysterical and trying to avoid us ( if they just walked past calmly nothing would happen but they start to do the river dance with their dog and can't decide if they want to run or hide which in turns set of my dogs ) 

owners that stop dead as we walk past or walk past with there dog on the side of our dog when really both the dog walkers should be in-between the dogs so less of a chance of dogs lunging at each other 


if we are sat somewhere for a while they get very territorial and will then bark if a dog walk past 
however what we have realised is that if they both start to bark at a dog and can't get to it they will turn on each other ( we have actually had this happen its almost like f... can't get that dog so you will have to do and they then will attack each other even though they live eat sleep with each other it makes no difference when they are excited ) 

so if we sit down somewhere we make sure that neither of the dogs can get to each other if something happens preventing it is far easier than being in a fight with two big dogs 

we had a incident recently where our old dog had died and the two older ddbs began fighting not long after at first it was just mouthing and stalking each other round the garden then it got worse resulting in a massive fight where both dogs have ended up at the vets and had to have surgery for cuts and a huge bet bill for 500+++ for both dogs 

the only way we could separate them was for dh to literally punch the bigger one in the head which shocked him into stopping for a second and then i switched on the hose pipe which kept them separated


----------



## Howl (Apr 10, 2012)

Dogless said:


> I'm wondering what that was now; am I your antisocial owner example? .


 knew you wouldn't mind so I think that makes you sociable I am afraid.


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

Howl said:


> knew you wouldn't mind so I think that makes you sociable I am afraid.


Oh well ; think I know what you're on about now....purposefully avoided her yesterday even though Kilo and her dog love each other and she is nice too. I know what route she walks at what time so went a different way .


----------



## Howl (Apr 10, 2012)

People can't avoid my two I am afraid we aren't organised enough. We walk a different route and at a different time most days.  
You know in films when people have detectives or murderers and they have been watching their routine for weeks mine is so higgly piggly it would be funny to see anyone try! :001_tt2:


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

Howl said:


> People can't avoid my two I am afraid we aren't organised enough. We walk a different route and at a different time most days.
> You know in films when people have detectives or murderers and they have been watching their routine for weeks mine is so higgly piggly it would be funny to see anyone try! :001_tt2:


Mine is all over the place too - times and locations!


----------



## Howl (Apr 10, 2012)

Keeps the hairy ones guessing


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

charlearose said:


> we had a incident recently where our old dog had died and the two older ddbs began fighting not long after at first it was just mouthing and stalking each other round the garden then it got worse resulting in a massive fight where both dogs have ended up at the vets and had to have surgery for cuts and a huge bet bill for 500+++ for both dogs
> 
> *the only way we could separate them was for dh to literally punch the bigger one in the head which *shocked him into stopping for a second and then i switched on the hose pipe which kept them separated


Ive read so many times how brute force seems to be the only answer. Its just not something I would be capable of doing. Thats why I was hoping to find a safer way, by using a spray or something that doesnt have a lasting effect


----------



## ozrex (Aug 30, 2011)

Ang2 I don't think I'm much help, as I'm FAR from a behaviourist but I do have an aggressive dog...

I think it would be very dangerous to get involved in a dog fight in any way. Househens seems to have done it and succeeded and maybe some others but I can tell you what happens when it goes wrong.

When Rex was still with his original owner he attacked two trespassing GSDs and there was a fight. Rex's previous owner grabbed Rex. Rex bit his previous owner so hard he broke both bones in the man's forearm. Crunched both radius and ulna. Previous owner's arm is terribly scarred. Rex seemed totally unaware that he'd ever bitten his owner.

I think that if the fight is serious then letting the dogs fight might be a realistic option. Rex won't stop for a shout (previous owner shouted) and grabbing him was a disaster. If he'd been punched he would have bitten the hand (and broken bone there too) and I can't imagine him noticing a hose/water/etc or caring if he did. When he fights his concentration is TOTAL.

The two GSDs managed to run away. Rex stopped when they ran. They were both badly hurt.

I believe Rex has killed a dog before I owned him.

I am working on reducing Rex's lousy body language at the moment. It was no coincidence that it was Rex that loose dogs would go for in preference to other dogs. LeashedforLife gave me some great advice and Rex is walking MUCH better, in a far more relaxed way.

If you want to intervene in a dog fight I'd listen to Househens but my advice is_ don't_. It may be possible for a little dog but NOT a dog like Rex; you could get horribly injured (he's a 40kg GSDx).


----------



## Coinneach (Apr 18, 2012)

Having been bitten quite a few times in my younger days while trying to break up fights between our collies, I'd say that once a fight has started, it's safer to stand back and not get involved. If you do, you risk getting hurt pretty badly yourself, and chances are the dogs will carry on anyway. Most of the time, it's just a scrap - exerting dominance - and will be over fairly quickly. Yes, it can be traumatic for the victim, but you don't often see serious injuries from a scrap. If it is a serious attack, you're unlikely to be able to break it up anyway, and even if you do succeed, you'll probably come under attack from the agressor, so if you do get involved, be prepared to defend yourself too. You could end up in a situation where both you and your dog are injured, and who's going to take it to the vet if you're in the back of an ambulance?

As for carrying a spray or something to break up a dog fight, if you're in the UK, you could be done for carrying an offensive weapon, even if you have no intention of using it on another person. Pepper spray or anything like that which has no other purpose would definitely be grounds for a charge. Hairspray or something which has another legitimate use, you may get away with - unless you say you're carrying it in case you or your dog get attacked. The same goes for cricket bats and tennis rackets.

The most sensible thing you can do is to use common sense and be aware of what's going on around you. Keep an eye out for aggressive dogs, and get your dog out of the way if necessary. It's much easier to avoid a fight than it is to stop one once it's started.


----------



## scarter (Apr 26, 2009)

Ang2 - I'm with you. I could never live with myself if I stood back and did nothing while my dog was savaged. I know you're not talking about fights. You're talking about savage animals attacking out of the blue. I live in a fairly nice area and I know of plenty of people that it's happened to. Normally staffies are the culprits. 

There's another thread on the go right now. A lady witnessed an old man and his dog walking along when a staffie came out of nowhere and attacked. Lots of people tried to get it off and the poor dog was badly ripped apart. As for it all being over in a split second - nope. It went on for minutes. The lady sprayed hand sanitizer in the dogs eyes in the end and it ran off. Others have suggested smelling salts.

Perhaps if you'd asked the question "What would you do if your child was being savaged by a dog - how would you get the dog off the child?". Although there are plenty of nut jobs that'd argue the child provoked it.

If it really comes down to avoidance, then we must all campaign to have dangerous breeds banned and owners held fully accountable for the actions of their dogs. I mean jail sentences if their dogs harm other peoples pets. I bet they'd be a bit less blaze about it then!


----------



## moonviolet (Aug 11, 2011)

scarter said:


> Ang2 - I'm with you. I could never live with myself if I stood back and did nothing while my dog was savaged. I know you're not talking about fights. You're talking about savage animals attacking out of the blue. I live in a fairly nice area and I know of plenty of people that it's happened to. Normally staffies are the culprits.
> 
> If it really comes down to avoidance, then we must all campaign to have dangerous breeds banned


Your post both saddens and offends me.

In your mind
How many individuals of a breed need to attack before we ban them?

What constitutes an attack? drawing blood? aggressive physical contact?

All dogs are capable of attacking should we just leash and muzzle them all? ban them all?

We need a legal clarification, so all law enforcemant agencies are applying both the 1881 and DDA laws in the same manner to deal with individual irresponsible owners.
We need better education for all dog owners about dog body language and walking etiquette. So many incidents could be avoided if these things were understood by all.


----------



## Galadriel17 (Jan 22, 2012)

scarter said:


> Ang2 - I'm with you. I could never live with myself if I stood back and did nothing while my dog was savaged. I know you're not talking about fights. You're talking about savage animals attacking out of the blue. I live in a fairly nice area and I know of plenty of people that it's happened to. Normally staffies are the culprits.
> 
> There's another thread on the go right now. A lady witnessed an old man and his dog walking along when a staffie came out of nowhere and attacked. Lots of people tried to get it off and the poor dog was badly ripped apart. As for it all being over in a split second - nope. It went on for minutes. The lady sprayed hand sanitizer in the dogs eyes in the end and it ran off. Others have suggested smelling salts.
> 
> ...


Your post saddens and offends me too.

What makes a dangerous breed? All dogs have teeth, all dogs can and do attack.

Do you feel the same way about people? I often think people with your kind of attitude must be racist too, either that or just very ignorant


----------



## pixieloulou1982 (Jan 28, 2012)

-eye rolls at the talk of dangerous breeds- I have been attacked by quite a few dogs. So I will list them and injuries sustained (joys of working with animals and walking my own dogs)

Facial attack 3 stitches, now have scar above right eye: *Yorkshire terrier*

My dog was attacked and my arm was bitten in process. Muscle and tissue damage: *Labrador*

Hand bitten when child going to pet dog-seven stitches, limited mobility and nerve damage on thumb: *St Bernard*

Good stories:

Protected from a herd of stampeding bulls -*Rotty* (I was 5 years old, friends dog)
Kept warm in winter (house had no central heating as a kid) -My uncles giant oaf of a dog-Dylan the *mastiff.*

No such thing as a dangerous breed. Dogs have teeth. No bad dog, only bad owners. I would walk through hot coals and the fires of hell before allowing a single person to claim my dog was aggressive just because he is a certain breed. My 7 year old daughter is more likely to bite a person than Sam dog my staffordshire. Shame on those that judge. Staffy's are viewed as aggressive due to over breeding, poor breeding and poor ownership. They are the most over populated breed in the uk and this is why attacks make the news.... its not that the breed is aggressive..more people own them and are stupid bad owners. I honestly have heard more stories of "kind gentle breeds" attacking than Staffordshires around my area. They don't reach the news because the media are biased.


----------



## Galadriel17 (Jan 22, 2012)

scarter said:


> Ang2 - I'm with you. I could never live with myself if I stood back and did nothing while my dog was savaged. I know you're not talking about fights. You're talking about savage animals attacking out of the blue. I live in a fairly nice area and I know of plenty of people that it's happened to. Normally staffies are the culprits.
> 
> There's another thread on the go right now. A lady witnessed an old man and his dog walking along when a staffie came out of nowhere and attacked. Lots of people tried to get it off and the poor dog was badly ripped apart. As for it all being over in a split second - nope. It went on for minutes. The lady sprayed hand sanitizer in the dogs eyes in the end and it ran off. Others have suggested smelling salts.
> 
> ...


Since you obviously have something against SBTs then Ill post a few videos that will hopefully open your mind; well-bred and well brought up, they are fantastic little dogs just like any other breed thats well-bred and well brought up!

Sadie and Violet  my video of the moment!
Sadie & Violet 2011 (Staffordshire Bull Terriers) - YouTube

A SBT entertaining a kitten
SAVAGE STAFFORDSHIRE BULL TERRIERS - YouTube

A SBT playing with a Beagle pup
Millie the puppy beagle - YouTube

14 week old SBT puppy practicing tricks
Staffordshire Bull Terrier Puppie training "Nico", tricks - YouTube

East Anglian Staffordshire Bull Terrier Display Team at Crufts 2012, the commentator tells you a little about each dog and youll find most of them live happily with other dogs or cats/other pets etc.
East Anglian Staffordshire Bull Terrier Display Team - Crufts 2012 - YouTube

I could go on and on with the videos but Ill leave it at that.

Theyre only downfall is their popularity with irresponsible idiots and that is due, in part (IMO), to breed specific legislation, not to mention ridiculous myths like they have lock jaw, and people/the media calling the breed dangerous when it's the other end of the lead they should be looking at.


----------



## Snoringbear (Sep 26, 2008)

scarter said:


> Ang2 - I'm with you. I could never live with myself if I stood back and did nothing while my dog was savaged. I know you're not talking about fights. You're talking about savage animals attacking out of the blue. I live in a fairly nice area and I know of plenty of people that it's happened to. *Normally staffies are the culprits.*
> 
> There's another thread on the go right now. A lady witnessed an old man and his dog walking along when a staffie came out of nowhere and attacked. Lots of people tried to get it off and the poor dog was badly ripped apart. As for it all being over in a split second - nope. It went on for minutes. The lady sprayed hand sanitizer in the dogs eyes in the end and it ran off. Others have suggested smelling salts.
> 
> ...


Utter, utter drivel. Both insulting and naive in equal measure. You're comments and thoughts are probably best reserved for the Daily Mail rather than a dog forum.


----------



## Jugsmalone (Apr 11, 2011)

scarter said:


> Ang2 - I'm with you. I could never live with myself if I stood back and did nothing while my dog was savaged. I know you're not talking about fights. You're talking about savage animals attacking out of the blue. I live in a fairly nice area and I know of plenty of people that it's happened to. *Normally staffies are the culprits.*
> 
> There's another thread on the go right now. A lady witnessed an old man and his dog walking along when a staffie came out of nowhere and attacked. Lots of people tried to get it off and the poor dog was badly ripped apart. As for it all being over in a split second - nope. It went on for minutes. The lady sprayed hand sanitizer in the dogs eyes in the end and it ran off. Others have suggested smelling salts.
> 
> ...


   :mad2: :mad2:


----------



## scarter (Apr 26, 2009)

> They're only downfall is their popularity with irresponsible idiots and that is due, in part (IMO), to breed specific legislation, not to mention ridiculous myths like they have 'lock jaw', and people/the media calling the breed dangerous when it's the other end of the lead they should be looking at.


Absolutely it's the owners that are to blame. As I said:

"I live in a fairly nice area and I know of plenty of people that it's happened to. Normally staffies are the culprits. "

Bad owners aren't all neds and druggies. Many are blissfully unaware of the fact that they are bad owners.

It's the reason that I am extremely wary of the breed. I don't care how many nice ones there are - when I see one coming towards me I have no idea of the dog's background or the owners character/intelligence. Often the owners has no clue as to the dog's background.

If there really isn't such a thing as a dangerous breed and it's all down to the owners then I'm cool with that (although personally I think you just have to look at different dogs to see that some are capable of inflicting much more damage than others). But if a person REALLY is willing to take responsibility and do whatever is necessary to guarantee the safety of others then so be it. If a dog (or any breed) maims or kills another dog (or child, a human) then the owner pays a heavy price - as if they committed the act. Not silly little fines that the insurance company pays, but really make the owner accountable.

Seriously, a pet dog is more than property - it's a family member. Can you imagine the horror of watching your baby being shredded before your eyes, screaming in terror - the attack lasting for several minutes. The attacking dog's owner (not always a druggy or a ned - often a seemingly responsible person) unable to do anything to stop it. They (thinking themselves responsible) apologise, offer to pay the vet bill and wander off shaking their head and claiming "I don't understand, he's never done anything like this before!". Or, "it was an accident - the lead snapped/gate was left open - won't happen again". Or worse still "dogs will be dogs". Not good enough!

A lot of people are in denial, but it happens all too often. You can't prevent it or avoid it. You are at the mercy of the other dog's owner. All too many people claiming to be responsible know they have dogs that have it in them to attack other pets but take the risk of letting the dogs run free because they think it unfair to keep it on lead. They have no right to take that risk with other peoples dogs. Sure, currently they can legally, but morally I think it's very wrong.

People should not own dogs that they can't reliably control. If someone wants to take a personal risk with a breed that's capable of inflicting more damage than most then so be it. But the dog (whatever it's breed) that they choose to bring into our society harms others then the law should come down on them like a ton of bricks. No excuses.

You see, people talk about prevention. But really that's down to the owners of the attacking dogs. Until the law starts coming down hard on them they won't accept full responsibility for the actions of their dogs.


----------



## moonviolet (Aug 11, 2011)

scarter said:


> Absolutely it's the owners that are to blame. As I said:
> 
> "I live in a fairly nice area and I know of plenty of people that it's happened to. Normally staffies are the culprits. "
> 
> ...


well where shall I start.....

My dog was attacked had to have a general anaesthetic... 10 stitches a drain. 2 initial course of Anti biotics, 3 staples had to be added after a few days A further course of AB as the wound was still weeping when the vet had hope it would have dried.

I have seen it, I have heard the screams, I have smelt blood and anal glands. I have taken the drive to vets that i don't remember and held my dog while they checked her for shock and admitted her for surgery. The dog who attacked was a GSD owned and being walked by a police officer who just walked away. Am i Campaigning for GSD's to be banned am I heck

By your own admission you have a Beagle who pins other dogs and you really don't know why.... never did it till after you added a second dog...I have a damn good idea, why but you won't want to hear it... in some peoples eyes your beagle is aggressive should we ban beagles?


----------



## Galadriel17 (Jan 22, 2012)

scarter said:


> *Absolutely it's the owners that are to blame.* As I said:
> 
> "I live in a fairly nice area and I know of plenty of people that it's happened to. Normally staffies are the culprits. "
> 
> Bad owners aren't all neds and druggies. Many are blissfully unaware of the fact that they are bad owners.


That's not the impression you gave at all. You put the blame on the dog, one breed in particular.



scarter said:


> It's the reason that I am extremely wary of the breed. I don't care how many nice ones there are - when I see one coming towards me I have no idea of the dog's background or the owners character/intelligence. Often the owners has no clue as to the dog's background.


You should exercise caution when meeting any unknown dog, not matter what the breed. If you educate yourself in canine body language, you can get a good feel of whether a dog's safe or not.



scarter said:


> If there really isn't such a thing as a dangerous breed and it's all down to the owners then I'm cool with that (although personally I think you just have to look at different dogs to see that some are capable of inflicting much more damage than others).


Of course a large dog like a Great Dane can potentially cause more damage than something like a Yorkie due to the size but what do you propose? Banning all dogs above a certain size? What size? Something as small as a Yorkie could easily kill a baby...



scarter said:


> But if a person REALLY is willing to take responsibility and do whatever is necessary to guarantee the safety of others then so be it. If a dog (or any breed) maims or kills another dog (or child, a human) then the owner pays a heavy price - as if they committed the act. Not silly little fines that the insurance company pays, but really make the owner accountable.


I would like to see higher penalties where an owner's actions result in serious damage being done to another animal (humans included) however attacks occur in the course of complex interactions between two (or more) sentient beings and occur in the most uncontrolled settings involving dozens of variables so identifying who/what was responsible for an attack is often very difficult.



scarter said:


> Seriously, a pet dog is more than property - it's a family member. Can you imagine the horror of watching your baby being shredded before your eyes, screaming in terror - the attack lasting for several minutes. The attacking dog's owner (not always a druggy or a ned - often a seemingly responsible person) unable to do anything to stop it. They (thinking themselves responsible) apologise, offer to pay the vet bill and wander off shaking their head and claiming "I don't understand, he's never done anything like this before!". Or, "it was an accident - the lead snapped/gate was left open - won't happen again". Or worse still "dogs will be dogs". Not good enough!


I try not to imagine such a horrific scene because if I did and applied the same to everything in life, I'd be living in perpetual fear.

I try and educate myself as best I can so I can prevent or limit such a scenario from happening so I don't have to rely on anyone else should something so uncommon happen but apart from that, I tend not to dwell on worst case scenarios.



scarter said:


> A lot of people are in denial, but it happens all too often. You can't prevent it or avoid it. You are at the mercy of the other dog's owner. All too many people claiming to be responsible know they have dogs that have it in them to attack other pets but take the risk of letting the dogs run free because they think it unfair to keep it on lead. They have no right to take that risk with other peoples dogs. Sure, currently they can legally, but morally I think it's very wrong.


People are irresponsible in life, that's just the way it is but you're not necessarily always at the mercy of others, you can take reasonable steps to prevent various scenarios from happening yourself. If you object to people owning pets that can cause damage to others then maybe you think no one should have dogs. Or cats for that matter, how do you feel about all the cats that murder and maim wildlife on a daily basis? Or horses, or birds or any other animal? Perhaps we should just ban all pets?



scarter said:


> People should not own dogs that they can't reliably control. If someone wants to take a personal risk *with a breed that's capable of inflicting more damage than most then so be it.* But the dog (whatever it's breed) that they choose to bring into our society harms others then the law should come down on them like a ton of bricks. No excuses.


So what breeds do you think are capable of inflicting more damage than most? Are you referring to the SBT again here? I can think of many many breeds with bigger, stronger jaws. I guess it goes back to the size thing then? Perhaps you think any breed bigger than a Beagle should be banned (although that wouldn't rule out the SBTs) but then Beagles can cause significant harm too…



scarter said:


> You see, people talk about prevention. *But really that's down to the owners of the attacking dogs.* Until the law starts coming down hard on them they won't accept full responsibility for the actions of their dogs.


I'm guessing you've not read this thread then? It's not actually just down to the attacking dog. Here's a little scenario for you: A very friendly, let's say, SBT goes running up to an on lead dog, the owner hasn't trained a good enough recall but shouts 'it's OK, he's friendly' but by the time the owner of the on lead dog (let's say he's a Lab) shouts 'it's not OK, he's not friendly' the lab has taken a chunk out of the SBT and the attacked dog is screaming, covered in blood, running back to his owner. Who's at fault?


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

scarter said:


> You can't prevent it or avoid it. You are at the mercy of the other dog's owner. All too many people claiming to be responsible know they have dogs that have it in them to attack other pets but take the risk of letting the dogs run free because they think it unfair to keep it on lead. They have no right to take that risk with other peoples dogs. Sure, currently they can legally, but morally I think it's very wrong.
> 
> People should not own dogs that they can't reliably control. If someone wants to take a personal risk with a breed that's capable of inflicting more damage than most then so be it. But the dog (whatever it's breed) that they choose to bring into our society harms others then the law should come down on them like a ton of bricks. No excuses.
> 
> You see, people talk about prevention. But really that's down to the owners of the attacking dogs. Until the law starts coming down hard on them they won't accept full responsibility for the actions of their dogs.


It not black and white though - so many factors are at play. On our walk this morning I saw two women with a BC and a mal. The BC was on a lead, I put Kilo on a lead and carried on our walk. I then heard shouting and saw the mal approaching and the woman chasing. She asked me to stand still so she could get him back, which I did (said "this breed shouldn't be off the lead but he's OK if we don't see anything or anyone").

Kilo lay down as he does when wary, the mal reached us, Kilo stood and they had a very stiff greeting. The mal then jumped up with his paws around Kilo's neck and growled and Kilo reacted growling and snarling. I pulled him away and the woman pulled the mal away - no harm done and the woman thanked me.

Point is, if Kilo had inflicted any damage on the mal should the law still then come down on me like a ton of bricks? I had exercised prevention by putting him on a lead and continuing to walk away. I also would have been loathe to accept full responsibility for any damage caused.


----------



## scarter (Apr 26, 2009)

Dogless, absolutely it's not black and white. Very tricky to come up with reasonable laws regarding dog control. Which is no doubt why it's such a controversial issue.

On the one hand I tend to agree that if your dog is onlead and someone elses dog comes charging over then they are at fault. They don't have control of their dog. They absolutely should have.

BUT....

What if a child came running over to your dog and flung it's arms around it's neck? Is it OK for the dog to attack then?

My own dog is always kept onlead - partly because we don't have reliable control when she's off-lead, and partly because she can be aggressive. Now she has never so much as scratched another dog. She will snarl, lunge and pin the other dog if it gets in her face (hasn't done this for years because we don't allow it, but I think she's still got it in her to do it). According to behaviourists always the other dog's fault. But to my mind she is over-reacting and acting aggressively where another dog would just tolerate or ignore. I therefore feel that even when another dog is being a complete pest I have to take at least partial responsibility if she reacts and we aren't able to control her and prevent her from overreacting. Now I'll stress - what my dog does is nothing compared to what a lot of dogs do every day and their owners consider "dogs being dogs". But I just don't think it's acceptable to inflict this on others.

I have to say, that if I thought there was a chance she'd bite and do serious damage then I'd muzzle her when outside. Dogs that aren't rock solid are a potential danger to others. Sadly you can't completely control their environment and keep away all things that are likely to provoke them.

Anyway, in the case of the incident this morning with the lady with the Mal. If she was likely to end up in serious trouble if her dog attacked another dog I think there's every chance that she'd be less willing to let him loose when there didn't seem to be anyone about. She knows what he's like but is prepared to take a risk. Question is, does she have the right to take a risk with other peoples' dogs? I say no.

What I do know for certain is that it's not acceptable to have pets ripped apart in front of their owners eyes (or children, postal workers etc savaged). It happens too much and something has to be done to put a stop to it.

Do you ban entire breeds (those capable of inflicting most damage)? Do you strictly control who is allowed to keep dogs through licensing? Do you require that all dogs are kept on lead in public places?

Or do you just accept the deaths and injuries as part and parcel of life and trundle on as normal? I say a BIG no to this!!


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

scarter said:


> Dogless, absolutely it's not black and white. Very tricky to come up with reasonable laws regarding dog control. Which is no doubt why it's such a controversial issue.
> 
> On the one hand I tend to agree that if your dog is onlead and someone elses dog comes charging over then they are at fault. They don't have control of their dog. They absolutely should have.
> 
> ...


You do make some very valid points and some that I completely disagree with; I am all for responsible ownership and do my utmost to keep Kilo and other dogs safe as far as I possibly can. I just wonder where your blanket banning ideas would end? First the rotties, ridgies, SBTs etc are banned and are no more. Then aggressive incidents continue so labs, pointers, spaniels are banned. But dog aggression still exists so beagles, JRTs etc are banned....and on and on until dog ownership full stop is outlawed.


----------



## hayleyth (May 9, 2012)

Ive read some of the thread but its so long have to admit i dont know what to say.. Aha


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

If all dogs who aren't "rock solid" were kept on a leash then there would be practically no dogs able to go off leash. And if all dogs who are a potential danger are kept leashed and muzzled then ALL dogs will be leashed and muzzled because they all have the potential to maim and kill.

And who decides what is an attack anyway? Talk to some people and if their dog so much as looks at another dog funny it's vicious, others refuse to believe their dog has attacked another dog when the other dog has died! I've had a dog who looked and sounded like he was killing other dogs if they hurt him or didn't heed his more subtle warnings that he didn't want them jumping on him. However he never left a mark on them. I've also had one who gave practically no warning but who would attack silently and for no real reason and cause serious damage with every bite. Guess which one most people considered vicious?


----------



## moonviolet (Aug 11, 2011)

I have to agree with Dogless it's just not black and white. The emphasis should be on all owners having responsibilty for their dogs and the interactions of their dogs at all times. On owners ensuring they educate themselves on dog behaviour, body language and the simple rules that could avoid so many of these situation arising.

You can make as many laws as you like they are only as good as their enforcement. 

There's a difference between dog agression and prey drive. It's just not simple. A spooked dog can move in an undoglike fashion and spark prey drive in an over aroused dog (I believe that is what happened in Tinker's case)

Muzzling isn't a be all and end all answer as i found out when I was prodded in the rear end by a muzzled leonberger. A muzzle thump from a strong dog can do serious damage.

Human aggression is a totally seperate issue. 

The only way to ensure zero dog on dog attacks is to ban all dogs. 

Educate yourself, body language and walk wisely, be aware at all times, avoid situations that could spark aggression balls toys , treats etc. Dogs on lead are on lead for a reason give them space. Accept that it's not essential for you dog to meet or like every other dog, That every dog is not a suitable play mate. etc etc etc.

If your local area is plagued by a certain dog or dogs report it to the council dog warden or EHO responsible. Help them address the owners that are at fault before they punish all the dog owners in the area.


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

moonviolet said:


> Muzzling isn't a be all and end all answer as i found out when I was prodded in the rear end by a muzzled leonberger. A muzzle thump from a strong dog can do serious damage.


Agreed. I've had countless bloody noses, split lips and black eyes from my own muzzled dog and he wasn't even trying to hurt me, just to lick my face! He also slammed another dog into the ground and broke its ribs while wearing his muzzle. We'd had 4 or 5 dogs come charging over on the street and surround us, obviously I couldn't body block them all and one got hurt.


----------



## scarter (Apr 26, 2009)

The way I see it dogless, you (not you personally) know your own dog best. If you think there's any risk that your dog will do serious damage to another dog (without provocation) then you really must keep it under control and take whatever steps are necessary to prevent another dog from being harmed. We are all entitled to walk the streets and local parks with our dogs and feel safe. Most dog owners love their dogs every bit as much as they do children - it is never acceptable for one dog to kill or maim another. If you make the choice to own a dog that is more prone to attacking other dogs (for whatever reason) then you have an obligation to take extra care to ensure that it can never happen.

I see no reason why any responsible person should object to having the law come down on them like a ton of bricks if their dog launches an unprovoked attack. They made the decision to bring this dog into the neighborhood and they wouldn't have done that if they weren't absolutely certain the dog wasn't a danger. The ones the law will make a difference to are the irresponsible ones that don't really care what harm their dog does to others. I think many will begin to care when, if their dog attacks, then a) it's taken off the streets and prevented from harming anyone else, b) they end up with some pretty serious consequences - and not just a piddling fine! c) they are banned from ever owning dogs again.

This is the kind of unprovoked attack that's happening all too often. There have been several in this last year in my local area:



> Saw A Dog Attack Today
> Its the first one I have ever seen and it was quite shocking. An elderly man was walking his elderly Akita when a Staffordshire bull terrier escaped his flat followed by his druggy owners. The staffy can running into the road and started to attack the man and his dog. I was at work between patients and it happened all in the road before me. The owners and elderly man couldnt get the staffy off the akita and a crowd was gathering. I rang the police 999 and was told by the switch board "they do not deal with dog attacks" I explained the man had also been bitten and the attack was ongoing and the innocent dog was being mauled. The asked for the mans name and said they would contact the man later! they "dont do dogs"!!! well this attack was now 10 mins in (well thats what it felt like) I had pulled really close in the car and sounded the horn to no effect. The owners were pulling the dog, hitting him and poking him in the face but he would not let go. The akitas leg was now deformed and bleeding+++. People many not agree with what I did next but due to my job I carry lots of alcohol hygiene gel. I squirted lots of it all in the dogs face and he let go. Im not sure of the lasting effects of this but it worked.
> Apparently according to surrounding people this is an ongoing issue with this dog, what can be done?
> I have to say the reaction of the people in surrounding housing was brillaint. One man bought out water and towels. Another man had a van and took the man and akita to recieve care straight away. Poor elderly Akita i cant imagine the outcome will be good for him.
> really disappointed with the police, the dog was attacking people randomly it could have been a child BUT apparently they dont do dogs


It's outrageous that the police won't act. The law needs to change. The sickening thing is that the owners of the attacking dogs aren't always irresponsible druggies. Often it's people that simply didn't believe their sweet dog was capable of this. Or maybe some just didn't care.

This is very much a black and white case - and not an uncommon occurrence. So, getting back to topic - as people are within their legal rights to own dogs that repeatedly launch this kind of attack on innocent dogs, how do we rescue them if god forbid OUR dog is a victim? And for those that can't envisage putting themselves at risk to save their dog then look at it another way. What if it were a child being attacked - what would you do to save it?


----------



## hayleyth (May 9, 2012)

scarter said:


> The way I see it dogless, you (not you personally) know your own dog best. If you think there's any risk that your dog will do serious damage to another dog (without provocation) then you really must keep it under control and take whatever steps are necessary to prevent another dog from being harmed. We are all entitled to walk the streets and local parks with our dogs and feel safe. Most dog owners love their dogs every bit as much as they do children - it is never acceptable for one dog to kill or maim another. If you make the choice to own a dog that is more prone to attacking other dogs (for whatever reason) then you have an obligation to take extra care to ensure that it can never happen.
> 
> I see no reason why any responsible person should object to having the law come down on them like a ton of bricks if their dog launches an unprovoked attack. They made the decision to bring this dog into the neighborhood and they wouldn't have done that if they weren't absolutely certain the dog wasn't a danger. The ones the law will make a difference to are the irresponsible ones that don't really care what harm their dog does to others. I think many will begin to care when, if their dog attacks, then a) it's taken off the streets and prevented from harming anyone else, b) they end up with some pretty serious consequences - and not just a piddling fine! c) they are banned from ever owning dogs again.
> 
> ...


I know for certain dogs which were bred for hunting, you shouldnt try and pull the child or dog away. The dog will only let go once it believes the animal/child is dead. So therefore you are meant to make the child/person play dead and not move as pulling at the dog or person will make the dog ten times worse.

Tbh i dont know what id do, depends on the dog and the situation.


----------



## pogo (Jul 25, 2011)

scarter said:


> Dogless, absolutely it's not black and white. Very tricky to come up with reasonable laws regarding dog control. Which is no doubt why it's such a controversial issue.
> 
> On the one hand I tend to agree that if your dog is onlead and someone elses dog comes charging over then they are at fault. They don't have control of their dog. They absolutely should have.
> 
> ...


It's all about preventing accidents if a child did run up to chance and did this yes he would try and attack it, which is why for

1. in crowed areas i.e festival of late where lots of children are he is muzzled
2. in quieter places i will very sternly tell that child not to come near 'the big dog'


----------



## moonviolet (Aug 11, 2011)

scarter said:


> This is very much a black and white case - and not an uncommon occurrence. So, getting back to topic - as people are within their legal rights to own dogs that repeatedly launch this kind of attack on innocent dogs, how do we rescue them if god forbid OUR dog is a victim? And for those that can't envisage putting themselves at risk to save their dog then look at it another way. What if it were a child being attacked - what would you do to save it?


Yes, this is a horrific attack. I have a question if everyone knew this dog was a problem how many people had reported it? I agree under the DDA legislation this clearly should be a police matter. As i dont' think anyone could deny this dog was dangerously out of control in a public place.

So many people are happy to wring their hands and moan about things but not get off their rears and actually do something about things, If there is a dog that is regularly aggressively out of control be part of the solution, because if people are aware of an issue and doing nothing about it they are part of the problem. Society belongs to us, we all make it what it is.

I stuck up posters to get information about the owner of the dog who attacked Tink, I also created merry hell and actually had the dog warden visit the place to see if they could find him still on site. Be noisy, be annoying, quote the law at them. It's sad but true the creaking gate gets the oil.

Funding is tight and humans are lazy. Don't be fobbed off.

Make your community what you want it to be.


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

scarter said:


> The way I see it dogless, you (not you personally) know your own dog best. If you think there's any risk that your dog will do serious damage to another dog (without provocation) then you really must keep it under control and take whatever steps are necessary to prevent another dog from being harmed. We are all entitled to walk the streets and local parks with our dogs and feel safe. Most dog owners love their dogs every bit as much as they do children - it is never acceptable for one dog to kill or maim another. If you make the choice to own a dog that is more prone to attacking other dogs (for whatever reason) then you have an obligation to take extra care to ensure that it can never happen.
> 
> I see no reason why any responsible person should object to having the law come down on them like a ton of bricks if their dog launches an unprovoked attack. They made the decision to bring this dog into the neighborhood and they wouldn't have done that if they weren't absolutely certain the dog wasn't a danger. The ones the law will make a difference to are the irresponsible ones that don't really care what harm their dog does to others. I think many will begin to care when, if their dog attacks, then a) it's taken off the streets and prevented from harming anyone else, b) they end up with some pretty serious consequences - and not just a piddling fine! c) they are banned from ever owning dogs again.


The above is definitely what I do agree with; nothing is without risk and none of us can ever be certain that our dogs will never, ever harm another *but* we can do our very best with them and if we have any doubts at all take steps to ensure they aren't put in a position to do so. I like the ideas of laws that punish the irresponsible; I have my dog licensed when many others do not (or do not have a collar on their dogs with an ID tag, never mind license tag) and obey all the leash laws in parks etc when most do not - to protect my dog. A lurcher killed a man's JRT somewhere that I sometimes walk - I met the JRT's owner looking for his dog's collar the day after - and the men with the lurcher simply told him that his dog was dead and walked off. I doubt that a ban on owning dogs would affect them as I can't see them abiding by it - although again I do like the idea in principle.


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

scarter said:


> I see no reason why any responsible person should object to having the law come down on them like a ton of bricks if their dog launches an unprovoked attack. They made the decision to bring this dog into the neighborhood and they wouldn't have done that if they weren't absolutely certain the dog wasn't a danger.


But nobody can be absolutely certain their dog isn't a danger. ANY dog can bite if put in the right (wrong) circumstances.

And who would the law come down on like a ton of bricks in the situation I had? Me for owning a dangerous dog and taking all precautions necessary to comply with the law and try to prevent him causing harm to anyone or anything? Or the other owners for not complying with the law and having their dogs on leash and not having any sort of control over them? I have to say I'd strongly object to the law coming down on me like a ton of bricks in that situation! Yet I have little doubt that the blame would be placed on me and my dog.


----------



## scarter (Apr 26, 2009)

Sarah1983 said:


> But nobody can be absolutely certain their dog isn't a danger. ANY dog can bite if put in the right (wrong) circumstances.


Yes - I agree that any dog can bite - and that's part of the problem when it comes to dogs that are equipped to do extreme damage.

The trouble starts when you have large numbers of dogs in our society that have been selectively bred for their ability to fight other dogs - so tenacity, desire to attack, ability to do extreme damage. There are certain breeds that are prone to attacking other dogs in the most horrific way.

Of course individual dogs of this type can be fine with other dogs, but as you say - ANY dog can bite if put in the right (wrong) circumstances. When you put a dog that is equipped to do extreme damage in the right (wrong) circumstances then the result is going to be much worse than when you put the average spaniel, lab, collie etc in that position.



> And who would the law come down on like a ton of bricks in the situation I had? Me for owning a dangerous dog and taking all precautions necessary to comply with the law and try to prevent him causing harm to anyone or anything? Or the other owners for not complying with the law and having their dogs on leash and not having any sort of control over them? I have to say I'd strongly object to the law coming down on me like a ton of bricks in that situation! Yet I have little doubt that the blame would be placed on me and my dog.


I have to say that I am extremely sympathetic to that situation! My dogs just don't appreciate the company of other dogs. They aren't afraid. They're quite happy to walk past other dogs and even exchange polite greetings. But they don't like impolite (AKA 'friendly') dogs. They're always on-lead which means that they are at a disadvantage - they're stuck with us so can't run off to avoid other dogs. Our girl went through a stage of being reactive. We sorted that out, but it's very difficult to keep her behaving well when on a daily basis we have to tolerate the harassment of other, off-lead dogs and owners with no control over them. Most of those owners seem to feel that their dog has every right to run free and approach whoever it likes. My dogs both appear to be the most friendly, sweet, harmless dogs in the world so everyone wants their dog to be friends with them - we don't get a say in the matter!!!!

From my heart I would say 100% the other person's fault and not yours. But my head says differently....to a degree.

In our society dogs run freely off-lead. It's normal practice for dogs to approach other dogs uninvited. When you choose to bring a 'dangerous dog' (a dog capable of doing extreme damage) into society then really you should only do so if you feel you can guarantee the safety of others in normal day to day life.

Really I think that if people want to keep dangerous dogs, and if it's 'politically incorrect' to legislate for certain breeds only then ALL dogs need to be kept on-lead (or prohibited from approaching other dogs without permission) except in designated (and secure) off-lead parks - to avoid this type of problem.


----------



## moonviolet (Aug 11, 2011)

Inform and educate people you talk to (gently with tact). Publicise this information everywhere you can.

From Dog walking etiquette

_*1. One dog on lead, one dog off

Don't let your dog approach. Even if both are friendly, it is an unequal meeting and not fair to the on-lead dog. There is usually a reason the dog is on a lead: respect this, give space and move on.

2. Both dogs on lead

Ask permission first and wait for the answer. Even if the owner says it is OK, be careful: being on leads adds extra tension to any meeting. If the answer is no, respect this, give space and move on quickly and quietly. See DINOS manifesto for more details.

3. Both dogs off lead

a. If close enough

Ask permission for your dog to meet the other and then apply same rules as 2.

b. If not close enough

Observe.

Are there any obvious resources (toys, balls) that could cause friction? Yes? Then avoid potential conflict and move on.

Is the owner training the dog or playing with the dog? Yes? Then leave them in peace to enjoy their time together.

Is the dog reasonably matched to yours in age, mobility, size? Yes? Then it might make a suitable play mate - move closer and apply 3a.

All of this assumes good off-lead control of your dog. If you couldn't follow this etiquette because your dog would have already been over to the other dog, then use a lead until you can. And why not use the dog walking etiquette to drive your training? Here are some things you could to start work on:
■Walk close - stay by your side on or off lead whatever the distractions.
■Chase recall - call back your dog even if he has already decided he wants to say hi to the other (also useful when you come across livestock or wildlife).
■Emergency down - stop your dog wherever he is when you see another dog coming.
■Directional send away - great for teaching "full on" dogs to approach another more politely.
■Play bow - teach your dog to invite rather than intrude.*_

Also

Dogs In Need Of Space

Edited to add: I like many other people have worked incredibly hard to allow my dog the freedom of walking offlead. Her recall is reliable she does not approach other dogs unless i have received permission from their owner and in turn she is relased by me and then she approaches gently and with good manners. How very dare you suggest we should lose this freedom because of a minority of dog owners. I will fight for this freedom that i value and hold dear and I will also do everything in my power to educate those who are unaware and I will report those who simply don't care.


----------



## scarter (Apr 26, 2009)

> How very dare you suggest we should lose this freedom because of a minority of dog owners.


This is the problem though isn't it? It's always "How dare you this", "How dare you that".

"How very dare you suggest that I don't let my dog approach an offlead dog without permission"?????

Everyone wants to guard their chosen lifestyle. People that don't have reliable recall but find it easier to just let their dogs run free and approach others would probably say to you "How dare you try and educate me you cheeky sod - why should my dog be restricted because some people have dangerous dogs?".

As far as I am aware (and I would LOVE to know if I'm wrong), there is no legal requirement stopping off-lead dogs from approaching other onlead or offlead dogs without owners permission.

I very much agree with the sentiment of what you say, but unless there are laws or rules then really you can't go around foisting your views on others (under the guise of 'educating'). And even if you do people won't comply - and will probably be even less willing to cooperate if you get their backs up. See how easily your back 'gets up' when someone so much as suggests something that would restrict your dog's freedom?

I won't begin to tell you how frequently people in the park try to 'educate' me on their pet theories on how to raise dogs. Normally I get it from the ones that think that dogs should be allowed to be dogs - just unclip the lead and let them get on with it. It's normal for dogs to fight to establish pecking order! They are as confident in their beliefs as you are.

People won't agree so someone has to bite the bullet and make some laws to keep everyone safe. That way everyone knows what their responsibilities are and when things go wrong action can be taken against the offending party.


----------



## moonviolet (Aug 11, 2011)

I'm jsut rather fed up of seeing open spaces being closed to dogs or dogs on lead because we dont' address the problem of the few, soon we will only be allowed dogs in our own back gardens. If we don't stand up against hte irresponsible

Most of my walks are in areas where the country code is applied.

"Dogs under close control"

Surely under close control does not mean 100 yards away charging up to joggers, ramblers, mountain bikers and other dogs.

I'd rather help foster an environment wher close control means jsut that and people who do not are considered the exception. than demand we all have to have our dogs on 2m leads because it has to be legislated for the lowest common denominator.

ETA and what's more is even if a 2m lead law was passed the irresponsible ones wouldn't follow it anyway.


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

My dangerous dog was more than likely a labrador/german wirehaired pointer mix not a breed or mix you see as a status symbol and I assure you he was capable of causing just as much damage as a Staffie. In fact the Staffie that he got into a fight with came off far, far worse than he did.

As for dogs running freely off leash and approaching other dogs, I expect this on the park or on fields, I do NOT expect this on a busy road! Especially as the law states that dogs must be on a leash there. One of the precautions I took to try to ensure the safety of other dogs (he was a sweetheart with people) was to avoid taking him anywhere where dogs were likely to be off leash. Including parks where dogs were supposed to be kept leashed since hardly anybody follows that rule. I shouldn't have had to take that precaution, I should have been able to walk him without worrying about other peoples out of control dogs but I live in the real world and knew if I took him to the fields or park or woods dogs would approach him no matter what I did and other owners likely wouldn't care.

I do not want to see dogs kept leashed at all times, I enjoy being able to let my dog off leash and seeing him enjoy himself without the restrictions of a leash. It's something I really missed with Rupert and hope to enjoy again with Spencer. And it seems such a shame to punish the dogs and the responsible owners because some people simply don't give a sh*t about how their dog behaves or what problems it causes. Like Moonviolet, I'd rather see more people taking responsibility for their dogs and training their dogs and keeping close control of them, with or without a leash. 

Also, a leash does not equal control. I saw a young woman dragged across the park today by her bull terrier because it wanted to play with another dog. It's not the first time I've seen an out of control leashed dog and it won't be the last time. I've also seen people with off leash dogs who have excellent control over them.


----------



## pogo (Jul 25, 2011)

scarter said:


> This is the problem though isn't it? It's always "How dare you this", "How dare you that".
> 
> "How very dare you suggest that I don't let my dog approach an offlead dog without permission"?????
> 
> *Everyone wants to guard their chosen lifestyle.*


Well then i guard my right to own my _dangerous dogs_


----------



## scarter (Apr 26, 2009)

pogo said:


> Well then i guard my right to own my _dangerous dogs_


My point exactly.

And many will [and do] guard their right to give their dangerous dog every bit as much freedom as other dogs enjoy.

Which is no doubt why this thread started in the first place - people wanting to know the best way to save their dog should it be attacked by a dangerous, out of control dog.


----------



## pogo (Jul 25, 2011)

scarter said:


> My point exactly.
> 
> And many will [and do] guard their right to give their dangerous dog every bit as much freedom as other dogs enjoy.
> 
> Which is no doubt why this thread started in the first place - people wanting to know the best way to save their dog should it be attacked by a dangerous, out of control dog.


I think you missed the point my dogs ARE NOT dangerous and yes I let harv off lead as much a possible.

Breed should not come into this all dogs can and DO cause huge amounts of damage to other dogs and people.


----------



## Snoringbear (Sep 26, 2008)

A couple of examples of incidents involving dogs that have caused extreme damage.

Baby Girl Killed by Family Dog - Los Angeles Times

BBC NEWS | Health | 'My face transplant saved me'


----------



## scarter (Apr 26, 2009)

Oh without a doubt attacks on people happen too! There are numerous cases of attacks resulting in death or serious injury of children here (with photos so don't look if you're easily upset):

Dangerous dogs in the UK - Dangerous dogs in England - Rottweilers - Bull Terriers - List of Banned Dogs - Family Pets - Dangerous Dogs Act

Now I don't much care whether the powers that be determine that certain breeds are more prone to launching savage attacks or not. At the end of the day all that matters is that people feel that their pets and children are safe. So target legislation at certain breeds or target all breeds - just get the legislation in place to stop the attacks. Whatever they do people will object so they just need to bite the bullet, make a ruling and stand firm.

But the issue I have is that there are significantly more attacks on innocent pets than their are on children but no one gives a damn. The police won't act if you tell them your dog was viciously attacked - they only care if humans were in danger. So nothing is done about dog killers. I think that's shocking in a country where I suspect that to most dog owners their dog is loved every bit as much as a child. Yet in the eyes of the law it doesn't even have as much standing as property (such as your phone or handbag). The law should recognize the special value of peoples' pets.

To be fair, I know that people also have great concern that even children aren't protected by the law if a dog attacks on private property. Dogs can savage kids, postmen, gas men etc with no legal recourse. Of course that is very wrong too.

My brother's cat was seriously injured by the neighbours dog. It got into their garden and attacked the cat (so the cat was attacked in it's own garden). Police were called but couldn't do a thing because the attack happened on private property. If the dog had attacked the cat on the street they *might* have got involved. My brother asked what the legal position would be if he took a shovel to the dog's head if it got into his property again. The policeman said it would be his word against that of the dog and as the dog would be dead it shouldn't be a problem.... Hardly fair on the dog though as it was just following it's instincts - but if owners, the law etc don't take responsibility people will take the law into their own hands to protect their own.

The well-to-do (normally very nice) neighbours refused point blank to pay the vet bill claiming that it was just dogs being dogs. Sis-in-law found an old, little known law that was applicable and took them to court - couldn't find a lawyer that understood the old law so represented herself. The dog owner contacted their house insurance company to get legal advice and the insurance company told them they didn't have a leg to stand on. Insurance company phoned up sis-in-law and said they'd pay in full with compensation provided she dropped the case. She agreed.


----------



## pogo (Jul 25, 2011)

A legislation should cover ALL breeds which is why BSL is wrong. 

When harv was attacked for the god knows what time by another collie (nothing against the breed) no one so much as battered an eyelid never mind tried to help, and yet had it been the other way round there would have been an uproar.

Wrong? yes very much so. I also know of many, many people/dogs who have been bitten or attacked by collies, labs, goldies, westies, JRs etc as well as staffs and other devil dogs. So are they all dangerous dogs to be feared too?

Edit: will also say that link is incredibly bias, and some how manages to avoid all the hundreds of other cases of dog attacks done by other 'non dangerous' breeds  amazing that


----------



## moonviolet (Aug 11, 2011)

scarter said:


> My brother's cat was seriously injured by the neighbours dog. It got into their garden and attacked the cat (so the cat was attacked in it's own garden). Police were called but couldn't do a thing because the attack happened on private property. If the dog had attacked the cat on the street they *might* have got involved. My brother asked what the legal position would be if he took a shovel to the dog's head if it got into his property again. The policeman said it would be his word against that of the dog and as the dog would be dead it shouldn't be a problem.... Hardly fair on the dog though as it was just following it's instincts - but if owners, the law etc don't take responsibility people will take the law into their own hands to protect their own.


Wow, personally I'd look at more secure fencing rather than bludgeoning a pet to death with a shovel.


----------



## L/C (Aug 9, 2010)

scarter said:


> Oh without a doubt attacks on people happen too! There are numerous cases of attacks resulting in death or serious injury of children here (with photos so don't look if you're easily upset):
> 
> Dangerous dogs in the UK - Dangerous dogs in England - Rottweilers - Bull Terriers - List of Banned Dogs - Family Pets - Dangerous Dogs Act


The point of Snoringbear's post (I assume) is that one of the dogs was a lab and the other a pomeranian. So not 'dangerous' breeds at all. And that website you linked is a fairly hysterical one from the quick look I had at it.



scarter said:


> Now I don't much care whether the powers that be determine that certain breeds are more prone to launching savage attacks or not. At the end of the day all that matters is that people feel that their pets and children are safe. So target legislation at certain breeds or target all breeds - just get the legislation in place to stop the attacks. Whatever they do people will object so they just need to bite the bullet, make a ruling and stand firm.
> 
> But the issue I have is that there are significantly more attacks on innocent pets than their are on children but no one gives a damn. The police won't act if you tell them your dog was viciously attacked - they only care if humans were in danger. So nothing is done about dog killers. I think that's shocking in a country where I suspect that to most dog owners their dog is loved every bit as much as a child. Yet in the eyes of the law it doesn't even have as much standing as property (such as your phone or handbag). The law should recognize the special value of peoples' pets.
> 
> To be fair, I know that people also have great concern that even children aren't protected by the law if a dog attacks on private property. Dogs can savage kids, postmen, gas men etc with no legal recourse. Of course that is very wrong too.


The law is changing with regards to humans. TBH I don't think you can legislate for dog on dog attacks - how on earth do you prove who was at fault? It isn't always the dog that is more seriously injured. And without any other evidence it becomes one owners word against another unless you always assume that the more badly injured dog is the innocent party. That immediately means that owners of larger dogs will always be at a disadvantage if a smaller dog started an attack.



scarter said:


> My brother's cat was seriously injured by the neighbours dog. It got into their garden and attacked the cat (so the cat was attacked in it's own garden). Police were called but couldn't do a thing because the attack happened on private property. If the dog had attacked the cat on the street they *might* have got involved. My brother asked what the legal position would be if he took a shovel to the dog's head if it got into his property again. The policeman said it would be his word against that of the dog and as the dog would be dead it shouldn't be a problem.... Hardly fair on the dog though as it was just following it's instincts - but if owners, the law etc don't take responsibility people will take the law into their own hands to protect their own.
> 
> The well-to-do (normally very nice) neighbours refused point blank to pay the vet bill claiming that it was just dogs being dogs. Sis-in-law found an old, little known law that was applicable and took them to court - couldn't find a lawyer that understood the old law so represented herself. The dog owner contacted their house insurance company to get legal advice and the insurance company told them they didn't have a leg to stand on. Insurance company phoned up sis-in-law and said they'd pay in full with compensation provided she dropped the case. She agreed.


A horrible situation but what did your brother want to happen to the dog? Do you think it should have been PTS for attacking a cat? I don't. I think the neighbours should have paid the vets bill and re-fenced to make sure it couldn't happen again.

But...is the cat allowed to roam? I know that my dogs would do everything in their power to get to a cat and that might include going through a fence if they chased it from our garden. I have re-fenced our garden (at my own expense) to make sure that can't happen but the neighbours cat still comes in. Neighbours have refused to cat proof their garden.


----------



## Snoringbear (Sep 26, 2008)

I'm familiar with the flawed and biased UK and Spain site. It exists predominantly to demonise certain breeds at the exclusion of others where "safe breeds" have caused similar damage. Isabelle Dinoire's labrador inflicted far more series and disfiguring injuries than any of the breeds on that site. 

I didn't post those links to illustrate that dogs attacked humans. Rather in reference to your earlier comment regarding dogs being deemed dangerous due to an alledged ability to cause extreme damage to demonstrate the other breeds are capable of horrific damage as you appeared to think that so called fighting dogs have some kind of super-canine ability to cause damage.

Targeting certain breeds with legislation in an attempt to stop attacks has already been tried with the DDA 1991 and has failed dismally. Attacks have actually increased, if anything the DDA has done little else but promote irresponsible dog ownership.

Dog attacks on private property are covered under law. If a dog on private proerty where it is not permitted to eb and is dangerously out of control that is an offence under the DDA. All other private property is covered under the Dogs Act 1871. This also covers dog on dog attacks and other animals.


----------



## scarter (Apr 26, 2009)

pogo said:


> A legislation should cover ALL breeds which is why BSL is wrong.


I'd certainly have no problem with that. I'm more than willing to comply with any law that makes our communities safer for everyone!



> When harv was attacked for the god knows what time by another collie (nothing against the breed) no one so much as battered an eyelid never mind tried to help, and yet had it been the other way round there would have been an uproar.


Which is of course very upsetting and very unfair! My dogs have never been attacked but I know I'd be bloody furious with the owner whatever breed was responsible.



> Wrong? yes very much so. I also know of many, many people/dogs who have been bitten or attacked by collies, labs, goldies, westies, JRs etc as well as staffs and other devil dogs. So are they all dangerous dogs to be feared too?
> 
> Edit: will also say that link is incredibly bias, and some how manages to avoid all the hundreds of other cases of dog attacks done by other 'non dangerous' breeds  amazing that


Any dog that launches unprovoked attacks inflicting that kind of damage is of course dangerous. If indeed there are hundreds more cases of dog attacks like this then the problem of dangerous dogs is even bigger. And yes, people should be aware of ALL attacks. Not just those committed by certain breeds.

So, if we acknowledge that there are hundreds of cases of unprovoked dog attacks on children - savage attacks where the animals can't be dragged off, then it stands to reason that there are even more such attacks on dogs - you'll only hear about the tip of the iceberg - and that's bad enough! It's a problem and I know of many dog owners asking the same question as the OP. As you see from these examples (and the hundreds more that pogo talks of), with dangerous dogs avoidance really isn't in the hands of the victim. You're largely dependent upon the dangerous dog owner for that. In many cases the owner is totally stunned that the dog has it in them to savage their child - they're hardly likely to be vigilant when it comes to your dog. Many believe their dog to be harmless. Many are just too stupid or lazy to take adequate precautions.



> TBH I don't think you can legislate for dog on dog attacks - how on earth do you prove who was at fault?


It's tricky when two dogs get into a fight - but that situation can be avoided by keeping your own dog on lead. In this situation as an owner avoidance is indeed possible. But when an onlead dog is walking quietly along a road (where all dogs should be onlead - or under very close control) with it's owner and a dog (of any breed) charges up to it and starts ripping the helpless animal to shreds - in front of witnesses, then I think it's pretty clear who is at fault. Yet still nothing is done because dog on dog attacks is a civil matter.



> A horrible situation but what did your brother want to happen to the dog? Do you think it should have been PTS for attacking a cat? I don't. I think the neighbours should have paid the vets bill and re-fenced to make sure it couldn't happen again.


He wanted the vet bills paid and the dog kept under control - not much to ask. It had already killed chickens, attacked another cat etc. They live out in the country and this dog was allowed to roam free despite having a reputation for killing small animals. The owners refused to keep the dog under control saying it wasn't practical with their lifestyle and that dogs should be allowed to be dogs. A professional couple - not chavs. My brother's garden has a 6 foot fence around it - the dog owner has no fence around his garden. His cats are old, never roam and go no further than the back patio. When the insurance company paid up I believe they told the owners that they really had to control the dog or wouldn't be covered in future. The owners didn't want to do that so dumped it with a rescue. When they care so little about their own dog it's hardly a surprise that they don't give a rat's behind when their dog savages and kills other peoples pets! There are an awful lot of dog owners out there that really don't care about their own dogs let alone anyone elses.


----------



## pogo (Jul 25, 2011)

My point is you keep saying these dangerous dogs, that should include every dog on this planet! Not just so called 'devil dogs' on the news. 

Also you say that cases like the site shown are unprovoked? knowing kids these days i don't believe for a second that none of them did something to provoke the dog(s). The fault will always lie with the dog and not the 'precious little victim', no a dog shouldn't attack anyone BUT people/kids shouldn't provoke them and expect them to not react.


----------



## scarter (Apr 26, 2009)

Pogo, as I said, I have no problem with legislation that covers all breeds. I do personally believe that certain dogs are infinitely more dangerous than your average pooch, but I don't have a big thing about it and if others insist that all dogs are equally dangerous I'm prepared to go along with that. If the only way to protect people and innocent pets from the dangerous dogs in our society is to restrict all dogs then so be it. A lot of people would be up in arms about that but not me.

If it really is impossible to tell which dogs are going to launch these attacks then all dogs must be restrained. Right down to the little tea-cup yorkie.

The horrific thing is the majority of the attacks on that site were witnessed and really were unprovoked. But sure - kids shouldn't provoke dogs. But as you say they do. So supervising kids in the presence of dogs is vital. But tricky if there are strangers dogs (of unknown background) running free all over our parks, beaches and countryside. Kids need some freedom too. So maybe more dog-free zones? Which again I'd be cool with, but I think a lot would object.

These savage attacks just aren't acceptable. One attack is too many - yet we're hearing of so many. Way too many savage attacks on innocent onlead dogs for my liking. And an awful lot of them too close to home for comfort!


----------



## Snoringbear (Sep 26, 2008)

Dogs don't attack or do anything else without a reason. Unprovoked seems to be used in any incident where the victim hasn't made some kind of active threat or harm towards the dog. There are plenty of other passive means of provoking a dog which humans are incapable of either noticing or understanding - staring them down, removing toys/food, intruding upon a territorial dogs property etc for example.


----------



## scarter (Apr 26, 2009)

Snoringbear said:


> Dogs don't attack or do anything else without a reason. Unprovoked seems to be used in any incident where the victim hasn't made some kind of active threat or harm towards the dog. There are plenty of other passive means of provoking a dog which humans are incapable of either noticing or understanding - staring them down, removing toys/food, intruding upon a territorial dogs property etc for example.


Even assuming that this is true, is it really acceptable to have animals in our society that are capable of inflicting that kind of damage on people (children) simply because someone looks at them the wrong way, walks in the wrong place (or some other means of provoking a dog which humans are incapable of understanding)? I would say most definitely not! A dog lover might be willing to put up with the risks but why the hell should the rest of society? We wouldn't tolerate humans with such a short fuse - they'd be locked up in an instant if they behaved in this way. A dog that can't be trained to safely co-exist with humans and their ways is extremely dangerous and can't be allowed to mix freely with people. The dog's owner should be held fully accountable for any damage done to people or other dogs/pets.

And as for attacks on dogs. Well, if a dog can't walk nicely onlead beside it's owner without another dog taking exception and running out of a house to pounce on it and rip it to shreds then really that other dog is dangerous. Yup - I'm quite sure it is responding to something - perhaps it's genetic programming telling it that it must attack other dogs. Perhaps the dog walking past looks like a dog that stole it's bone when he was a puppy? Perhaps it has been misstreated in the past. Who knows? It's still a danger to other dogs and needs to be restrained. If it is allowed to attack another dog the owner should be held fully accountable. They are responsible - not the dog.

So, *if* certain dogs aren't inherently more dangerous than others - if all have potential to act in this way then I see no other option than to keep all dogs restrained - and make that legally enforceable with heavy penalties for those that let dogs get loose.


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

scarter said:


> Even assuming that this is true, is it really acceptable to have animals in our society that are capable of inflicting that kind of damage on people (children) simply because someone looks at them the wrong way, walks in the wrong place (or some other means of provoking a dog which humans are incapable of understanding)? I would say most definitely not! A dog lover might be willing to put up with the risks but why the hell should the rest of society? We wouldn't tolerate humans with such a short fuse - they'd be locked up in an instant if they behaved in this way. A dog that can't be trained to safely co-exist with humans and their ways is extremely dangerous and can't be allowed to mix freely with people. The dog's owner should be held fully accountable for any damage done to people or other dogs/pets.
> 
> And as for attacks on dogs. Well, if a dog can't walk nicely onlead beside it's owner without another dog taking exception and running out of a house to pounce on it and rip it to shreds then really that other dog is dangerous. Yup - I'm quite sure it is responding to something - perhaps it's genetic programming telling it that it must attack other dogs. Perhaps the dog walking past looks like a dog that stole it's bone when he was a puppy? Perhaps it has been misstreated in the past. Who knows? It's still a danger to other dogs and needs to be restrained. If it is allowed to attack another dog the owner should be held fully accountable. They are responsible - not the dog.
> 
> So, *if* certain dogs aren't inherently more dangerous than others - if all have potential to act in this way then I see no other option than to keep all dogs restrained - and make that legally enforceable with heavy penalties for those that let dogs get loose.


What awful rationale. Should we ban everyone from driving for life if they get 3 points? They might be a danger to a child who steps into the road. Should we fine parents if their children turn out badly for whatever reason? In fact lets just never leave the house, you never know if someone might push you over when you're at the end of the street.


----------



## pogo (Jul 25, 2011)

My Chance is a dog with a short fuse and isn't people friendly who ISN'T let off lead, and yet kids will run up and scream in his face and you wonder why kids get bit? 

What you seem to fail to grasp is these dogs who in your words are inherently more dangerous are no more 'people aggressive' then any other. Take staffies who seem to be involved in most attacks  are about as people friendly and loyal as it gets, yes some are DA but not towards people and yet they are still demonised. There isn't a breed that i'd trust more with kids then a staff.


----------



## Guest (Jul 20, 2012)

People really dont understand dogs, body language, provocation, or bite inhibition. Legislation doesnt make anyone safer, education does.

Ive been bitten with intention by both a fox terrier and a great dane. The terrier did more damage. He didnt have good bite inhibition. Bite inhibition is not just whether or not a dog will bite, but how hard they bite when they do. Because ALL dogs will bite if they reach their threshold.

The only way to prevent people getting hurt by dogs is to ban all dogs. 
And while were at it, ban coconuts and bees too because they kill more humans than dogs do.

IME most unprovoked attacks were actually provoked, just the humans involved didnt realize that what they or their dog was doing was provoking. Ive been out walking and have people run up to my dogs squealing and throw their arms around them. Ive had people literally shove puppies in to my dogs faces. At the vets office of all places (where you would assume the dog is not at his best anyway) Ive had people allow their small dog to jump up on to my dogs shoulder and bark in his face. My dogs didnt retaliate in any of these cases, because I was right there paying attention, had I not been, who knows what would have happened. But hey, if the big dog hurts the little one guess who is always found at fault?

Small animals have always been a target of prey driven dogs. Bully breeds are not the only prey driven dogs out there. Greyhounds are just as likely to kill the neighbors cat as a pit bull, but where is the outrage over all these dangerous greyhounds running around? What of the little terriers who find mice and kill them? Should they be muzzled every time they leave the house too? Because people keep mice and rats as pets too you know.

From what I can tell, BSL has not helped things at all. In fact all the facts point to this, that BSL does not work. Its expensive to enforce, its ineffective, and it doesnt keep anyone safer.


----------



## scarter (Apr 26, 2009)

> What awful rationale. Should we ban everyone from driving for life if they get 3 points? They might be a danger to a child who steps into the road. Should we fine parents if their children turn out badly for whatever reason? In fact lets just never leave the house, you never know if someone might push you over when you're at the end of the street.


I would say there's a HUGE difference between someone committing a driving offence that only earns them 3 points and a dog that has ripped a child's face off because it looked at it the wrong way.

As for whether parents should be held responsible for the actions of their children - YES! Until the kids are old enough to take responsibility for their own actions then their parent or guardian is responsible if they do harm to others.



> My Chance is a dog with a short fuse and isn't people friendly who ISN'T let off lead, and yet kids will run up and scream in his face and you wonder why kids get bit?
> 
> What you seem to fail to grasp is these dogs who in your words are inherently more dangerous are no more 'people aggressive' then any other.


I'm not following your logic here. On the one hand you say your dog isn't people friendly and has to be kept on lead and the next you're saying he isn't any more dangerous than any other dog? Are you trying to say that all dogs should be kept on lead because all are as dangerous as your chance?



> Take staffies who seem to be involved in most attacks are about as people friendly and loyal as it gets, yes some are DA but not towards people and yet they are still demonised. There isn't a breed that i'd trust more with kids then a staff.


I'm not going to get into arguments with you over whether staffies are more or less trustworthy with kids than other breeds. What I can say is that staffies have killed and maimed children - there are several examples of this. I don't think a teacup yorkie has managed this.

My particular concern with staffies isn't what they do to children. My concern is what they're prone to doing to other dogs. There are a tremendous number of vicious, unprovoked attacks by staffies on innocent dogs. As you say, some are dog aggressive - and when they get their teeth into a dog they do tremendous damage and refuse to let go. But if you believe that all breeds are equally as dangerous to other dogs as staffies then I'll go along with that. Which ever dogs are responsible it has to stop. Something has to be done to prevent it. If it means that teacup yorkies have to be muzzled in public for safety of all dogs then so be it!


----------



## pogo (Jul 25, 2011)

scarter said:


> I would say there's a HUGE difference between someone committing a driving offence that only earns them 3 points and a dog that has ripped a child's face off because it looked at it the wrong way.
> 
> As for whether parents should be held responsible for the actions of their children - YES! Until the kids are old enough to take responsibility for their own actions then their parent or guardian is responsible if they do harm to others.
> 
> ...


He isn't people friendly but do you no why he is no more a threat then any other dog? BECAUSE I DON'T LET HIM. It's called responsible dog ownership.

No i'm not saying keep all dogs on lead where the hell did you get that from?

Good god you need some educating....


----------



## Snoringbear (Sep 26, 2008)

ouesi said:


> People really dont understand dogs, body language, provocation, or bite inhibition. Legislation doesnt make anyone safer, education does.
> 
> Ive been bitten with intention by both a fox terrier and a great dane. The terrier did more damage. He didnt have good bite inhibition. Bite inhibition is not just whether or not a dog will bite, but how hard they bite when they do. Because ALL dogs will bite if they reach their threshold.
> 
> ...


Excellent post.


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

scarter said:


> What I can say is that staffies have killed and maimed children - there are several examples of this. I don't think a teacup yorkie has managed this.


I dunno about yorkies but one of the links Snoringbear posted was to a story about a Pomeranian killing a baby. A Dachshund also chewed off a toddlers genitals. Someone I know had their hand badly maimed enough by a toy breed that they are unable to use it. ALL dogs, no matter what size or breed, are capable of causing serious harm or even death to a human or other animal.


----------



## Jobeth (May 23, 2010)

I have a tiny yorkie and from searching I have found one incident of a yorkie killing someone and that was in America. I couldn't find any details though. I understand that she could bite, but I think with her size she is more at risk of being seriously harmed or killed than seriously harming or killing a person or dog. 
I do think that it should be deed not breed as if either of my small dogs hurt someone to the extent that I saw on that link I would be devastated.


----------



## scarter (Apr 26, 2009)

pogo said:


> He isn't people friendly but do you no why he is no more a threat then any other dog? BECAUSE I DON'T LET HIM. It's called responsible dog ownership.


Absolutely - and if all people were responsible there wouldn't be an issue. Sadly, there are clearly lots of dog owners that AREN'T responsible - proven by the fact that children, adults and dogs are frequently savaged and even killed by out of control dangerous dogs.

So, we've been all around the houses with the 'prevention' issue. Certainly there will be some cases where you can keep your dog safe by being vigilant. But many of these attacks come out of the blue - when you're walking your dog on lead, minding your own business and a dog comes charging out of a house and sinks it's teeth into your dog's throat. Or where your dog/child is happily playing in your garden and a dog leaps in and attacks it. That's down to lack of responsibility from the dog's owner. You have no power to do anything about that. At the moment the law is not any help and it would seem that most people here don't think the law should change to offer people more protection from irresponsible owners.

Hence the OP's question - if you dog (or child) is attacked by a dog what can you do to save it? We're not talking dog fights here, but when a dog (of any breed) charges out of nowhere and leaps onto your onlead dog and starts ripping lumps of flesh out of him, or where a dog jumps into your garden and attacks your child/dog. The kind of attack that lasts for minutes with your dog/child screaming in terror and bystanders unable to release it from the jaws of the attacking dog.

What does it take to save your dog/child? Will smelling salts work? Do you need to carry a knife? What would YOU do if you were walking along minding your own business and a large, powerful dog appeared out of nowhere and started ripping out your child/dog's throat?

I appreciate that some people would do nothing and just accept the fate of their dog/child rather than risk injury themselves. But many love their children and dogs so deeply that they'd give their lives - do ANYTHING to protect them. So, what is the best way to defend a dog/child against this kind of attack? Once again I'll say - I'm not singling out any breed. If it helps make people be more objective and less defensive we can assume the attacking dog is a rather large, powerful teacup yorkie.


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

scarter said:


> If it helps make people be more objective and less defensive we can assume *the attacking dog
> is a rather large, powerful teacup yorkie.*


which is of course, not only an oxymoron but a reflexive adj-noun pair, too. 
"teacup Yorkie"?!?! really - a 5# breed-average is ALREADY 'teacup'.


----------



## Guest (Jul 20, 2012)

scarter said:


> Absolutely - and if all people were responsible there wouldn't be an issue. Sadly, there are clearly lots of dog owners that AREN'T responsible - proven by the fact that children, adults and dogs are frequently savaged and even killed by out of control dangerous dogs.


*Frequently* savaged and killed by dogs?? Again, statistically your child is more likely to be killed by a coconut or a bee than a dog. Where is the outrage against coconuts? What about all the kids who die from accidental exposure to peanuts and shellfish?



scarter said:


> So, we've been all around the houses with the 'prevention' issue. Certainly there will be some cases where you can keep your dog safe by being vigilant. But many of these attacks come out of the blue - when you're walking your dog on lead, minding your own business and a dog comes charging out of a house and sinks it's teeth into your dog's throat. Or where your dog/child is happily playing in your garden and a dog leaps in and attacks it. That's down to lack of responsibility from the dog's owner. You have no power to do anything about that. At the moment the law is not any help and it would seem that most people here don't think the law should change to offer people more protection from irresponsible owners.


Laws only affect the law abiding. And the law abiding are usually already responsible. So adding more laws isnt going to make anyone safer.



scarter said:


> Hence the OP's question - if you dog (or child) is attacked by a dog what can you do to save it? We're not talking dog fights here, but when a dog (of any breed) charges out of nowhere and leaps onto your onlead dog and starts ripping lumps of flesh out of him, or where a dog jumps into your garden and attacks your child/dog. The kind of attack that lasts for minutes with your dog/child screaming in terror and bystanders unable to release it from the jaws of the attacking dog.
> 
> What does it take to save your dog/child? Will smelling salts work? Do you need to carry a knife? What would YOU do if you were walking along minding your own business and a large, powerful dog appeared out of nowhere and started ripping out your child/dog's throat?


As has already been stated, there is no ONE solution. If its a bully breed, use a break stick. If its a knife fighter breed (thanks L4L), wrap a leash around the dogs waist and get ready to yank away when they let go to go back in. In any of the above, know that you will very likely get hurt. 
Also know that I or anyone can sit here and calmly type out the best advice ever on what to do in a dog fight and the odds of people actually remembering and following that advice in a true emergency are slim to none.



scarter said:


> I appreciate that some people would do nothing and just accept the fate of their dog/child rather than risk injury themselves. But many love their children and dogs so deeply that they'd give their lives - do ANYTHING to protect them. So, what is the best way to defend a dog/child against this kind of attack? Once again I'll say - I'm not singling out any breed. If it helps make people be more objective and less defensive we can assume the attacking dog is a rather large, powerful teacup yorkie.


Ah yes, the I love my dog more than you do argument. I can assure you, love has nothing to do with it. If my dog were being savaged by another and I couldnt get it broken up, Id rather have someone with experience and knowledge helping me out than someone who dearly loves my dog.


----------



## moonviolet (Aug 11, 2011)

i'm really sorry if this photo upsets or offends anyone but i feel that it is appropriate to be shown.

This is my dog after she was attacked and patched up.









As you can see I'm not talking from an it could never happen to me head in the sand position. I do take great exception that because i did not stab, kick drag, jump on, nuke or otherwise attempt to harm the attacking dog, i do not love my dog like a family member.

Education is the key to responsible dog ownership.

If you have a particular problem in your area, Then notify your local authorities and keep it at the top of their inbox until you see action being taken.

I do not believe all dogs on lead is the answer. It prevents them expressing natural behaviour, it prevents natural approaches and their choice to avoid.


----------



## Guest (Jul 20, 2012)

moonviolet said:


> As you can see I'm not talking from an it could never happen to me head in the sand position. I do take great exception that because i did not stab, kick drag, jump, on nuke or otherwise attempt to harm the attacking dog, i do not love my dog like a family member.


Well duh moonviolet, dont you know that the amount of damage you did to the attacking dog is directly proportional to how much you love your own dog? /sarcasm.



moonviolet said:


> *Education is the key to responsible dog ownership.*
> 
> If you have a particular problem in your area, Then notify your local authorities and keep it at the top of their inbox until you see action being taken.
> 
> I do not believe all dogs on lead is the answer. It prevents them expressing natural behaviour, it prevents natural approaches and their choice to avoid.


The bolded is key. Education, not legislation. Enforce the laws already in place instead of making more laws that are going to be ineffectively enforced.


----------



## scarter (Apr 26, 2009)

ouesi said:


> *Frequently* savaged and killed by dogs?? Again, statistically your child is more likely to be killed by a coconut or a bee than a dog. Where is the outrage against coconuts? What about all the kids who die from accidental exposure to peanuts and shellfish?


I'm sure that would be a valid topic for discussion - avoiding accidental exposure to peanuts and shellfish. Or how to deal with the situation should it occur.



ouesi said:


> Ah yes, the I love my dog more than you do argument. I can assure you, love has nothing to do with it. If my dog were being savaged by another and I couldnt get it broken up, Id rather have someone with experience and knowledge helping me out than someone who dearly loves my dog.


No - not the "I love my dog more than you do" argument. Previously in this thread some people advised that you should stand back and not get involved as it's too dangerous. I'm merely pointing out that to many people that is not an acceptable course of action.



> As has already been stated, there is no ONE solution. If its a bully breed, use a break stick. If its a knife fighter breed (thanks L4L), wrap a leash around the dogs waist and get ready to yank away when they let go to go back in. In any of the above, know that you will very likely get hurt.


Now these are the type of suggestion that are relevant. Other things (as well as these) were also stated but dismissed by some - for example, one person suggested choking the dog with a slip lead. Lots of people will have different ideas - especially with regards to approaches that might be best with specific breeds. It's helpful to hear all ideas.

It might be worth carrying a break stick and spare lead then. What about smelling salts - that was suggested on another thread (apparently someone read on a Pit Bull discussion forum that an ammonia soaked rag was good for getting a Pit Bull to release it's hold and they figured smelling salts would work just as well). Or the hygiene gel that worked on the staffy that was so reluctant to release it's hold (the thread regarding the dog that was attacked the day before yesterday).


----------



## pogo (Jul 25, 2011)

scarter said:


> Absolutely - and if all people were responsible there wouldn't be an issue. Sadly, there are clearly lots of dog owners that AREN'T responsible - proven by the fact that children, adults and dogs are frequently savaged and even killed by out of control dangerous dogs.
> 
> I appreciate that some people would do nothing and just accept the fate of their dog/child rather than risk injury themselves. But many love their children and dogs so deeply that they'd give their lives - do ANYTHING to protect them. So, what is the best way to defend a dog/child against this kind of attack? Once again I'll say - I'm not singling out any breed. If it helps make people be more objective and less defensive we can assume the attacking dog is a rather large, powerful teacup yorkie.


my dogs mean the world to me, and yes when they have been in fights I have stepped in, which when 2 fully grown male dogs a rottie and ambull going at, believe you me it's not the easiest thing to stop or separate, but we managed. Did i stop to think i might get hurt? Nope Chance came first.

And as someone pointed out your child is more likely to be killed with a bee sting or something minor then by a dog. So the key is training people in responsible ownership AND teaching kids especially how to approach or behave around dogs whether the family pet or a strange dog.


----------



## scarter (Apr 26, 2009)

pogo said:


> my dogs mean the world to me, and yes when they have been in fights I have stepped in, which when 2 fully grown male dogs a rottie and ambull going at, believe you me it's not the easiest thing to stop or separate, but we managed. Did i stop to think i might get hurt? Nope Chance came first.


I think that's how most people feel - you have to step in and put a stop to it. But let me stress - I'm not in any way suggesting that those that don't step in don't love their dogs. Just explaining that standing by and doing nothing is just not an option for many people - even if it means risking their own lives.



> And as someone pointed out your child is more likely to be killed with a bee sting or something minor then by a dog. So the key is training people in responsible ownership AND teaching kids especially how to approach or behave around dogs whether the family pet or a strange dog.


OK, but in the meantime, while education is ongoing, if your child or dog is the victim of an attack......

You've had direct experience of stopping fights between very large, powerful dogs. Tell us more about how you did it? That will be very helpful! Can you also try and think what might be different if it weren't a fight, but one large, powerful dog savaging a small dog that's terrified, badly injured and not able to fight back? Or a child. Might that make a difference to your approach?


----------



## pogo (Jul 25, 2011)

scarter said:


> I think that's how most people feel - you have to step in and put a stop to it. But let me stress - I'm not in any way suggesting that those that don't step in don't love their dogs. Just explaining that standing by and doing nothing is just not an option for many people - even if it means risking their own lives.
> 
> OK, but in the meantime, while education is ongoing, if your child or dog is the victim of an attack......
> 
> You've had direct experience of stopping fights between very large, powerful dogs. Tell us more about how you did it? That will be very helpful! Can you also try and think what might be different if it weren't a fight, but one large, powerful dog savaging a small dog that's terrified, badly injured and not able to fight back? Or a child. Might that make a difference to your approach?


I didn't mean that people who don't step in love their dogs less just stating a fact.

In the incident with Chance and buddie (rottie) buddie is DA and Chance is an ex fighter, so not the best combination.

Chance had buddie pinned by the throat yada yada and me, the OH and buddies owner were there. She twisted buddies collar and I punched Chance, (I am alot stronger then the average lass, he felt it but it still took a couple) and between the 3 managed to move them as soon as they loosened their grip and let go, but it did take time and buddie had to go to the vet for many stitches. The only way it worked i feel as it caught his attention and that is when he loosened up enough, but these dogs could not have been left to sort it out the'd have killed each other.

TBH I don't know what you could do differently whether it was a big dog or small child.... So i wouldn't know what to suggest

Edit: i will say this where i say prevention is key, we know buddies owner and the 2 boys are never allowed near each other, the above incident happened when buddie slipped his harness


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

It is a hell of a lot easier breaking up a fight if one dog isn't fighting back than it is breaking up a fight when both dogs are going at it with no intention of backing down. You've only got one dog to deal with instead of two. 

To be honest, you're damned if you do and damned if you don't. Don't get involved and you risk your dog or child being seriously injured or killed, try and break it up and you still risk your dog or child being seriously injured or killed plus you getting seriously injured or killed yourself. And if the dog has latched on you absolutely do NOT pull or you'll cause more damage. I wouldn't be able to just stand there though, I'd have to do something. 

Of course a large dog is going to cause a hell of a lot more damage with each bite than a small one but what do you suggest? Banning all but the tiny dogs? Keeping anything above a certain size leashed and muzzled? Would you still be as open to legislation against certain breeds if it meant your own dogs would be seized and killed? Education is what's needed, not more laws that nobody will follow and that won't be enforced.


----------



## moonviolet (Aug 11, 2011)

scarter said:


> I think that's how most people feel - you have to step in and put a stop to it. But let me stress - I'm not in any way suggesting that those that don't step in don't love their dogs. Just explaining that standing by and doing nothing is just not an option for many people - even if it means risking their own lives.


Tinker's injuries were worsened by the owner who stepped in forceably dragging his dog off without it letting go causing the huge tear you see. In essence what he did was as threatening to her life as his dog. I was holding off his other dog. Anyone who has seen 2 terriers on either end of a rabbit will know why.

Attacks are different from fights. Had he tried the wheelbarrow method ( I doubt I could have lifted his dog) it may have worked.... and Tink would only have had puncture wounds.

Anything that causes the attacking dog to feel like they are being attacked is likely to make them bite harder.

There is no simple answer.

Scarter. i'm glad you seem to have taken on board that banning breeds isn't the answer.


----------



## Malmum (Aug 1, 2010)

Smelling salts - the simple answer!  I NEVER go out without mine.


----------



## Ang2 (Jun 15, 2012)

Scarter has made some very valid points. 

Firstly with regard to Staffies, they are bred for fighting and aggression towards other dogs. I know there are exceptions and some are very sweet. Their reputation comes mostly from the type of owners they attract. Because they have a reputation for fighting, they are more than often owned by those who quite like the fact that they own an aggressive dog.

Secondly, if you own a dog that is aggressive towards other dogs, then you know about it! You have a duty of care towards other people and their dogs to protect them from a possible attack. If you know your dog is capable of attacking another dog, for whatever reason, and will not respond to recall, then it should not be off the lead. My on lead dog is never off the lead for this very reason. We have been on some walks where Ive had clear view for miles and not another dog in sight - and I still wouldnt risk it. He has never attacked another dog because he has never had the chance. However, I know his body language and I know he is capable of aggression. His recall also sucks - tested in my friends secure paddock. Also, when dogs run up to him, I am able to control him by his collar and stern words.

It keeps getting repeated that the best protection is avoidance. Tell that to the old man and his savaged dog! 

I suggested at the beginning of this thread that I was thinking of carrying a spray, after almost walking into a potentially dangerous situation myself. I was berated for this suggestion, yet it was the only thing that worked in saving the old mans dog. In contrast, the person who used the spray was thanked and praised for their actions. Not one person said they thought it was inappropriate!


----------



## Galadriel17 (Jan 22, 2012)

Scarter, you seem to think serious dog attacks are common when they really are not.

Between 2007 and 2008, 4,699 people were admitted to hospital for treatment following a dog bite or strike. Yes strikes are included in the figures too, that means accidental injuries like falling over your dog.

With the human population over 60,000,000 and the dog population an estimated 10,000,000, 4,699 really is not a lot.

Death by dog is very rare. You are a good deal more likely to be killed by your own parents than you are by a dog.

Although there are no figures that I can find to back up what I'm about to say, serious dog on dog attacks are also pretty uncommon I believe. If you have any figures to show that's not the case then I'd love to see them.

There's a book which I keep meaning to order, maybe you'd like to read it too, it's called Dogs Bite But Balloons and Slippers Are More Dangerous.

Life is dangerous! Whoever it was the suggested we should all just stay in the house :lol: I don't think we should do that either as if I remember rightly, most accidents happen in the home :lol:


----------



## Galadriel17 (Jan 22, 2012)

Ang2 said:


> ...Firstly with regard to Staffies, they are bred for fighting and aggression towards other dogs...


Staffordshire Bull Terriers are not bred for fighting. Dog fighting was banned in 1835 and the SBT was first recognised by the KC in 1935. Yes it has dog fighting ancestors but good breeders only choose to breed from dogs with a good temperament, and that includes towards other dogs. Every breeder I've looked at over the last 6 months has at least 3 in the house, some have 7, all happily living together, all good with other dogs.

We do have a problem with bad breeding (although that's not just with SBTs) where emphasis on health and temperament isn't placed and that is an area I would welcome some sort of legislation change because if dogs weren't so readily available from people who care about little more than money then I think a good deal of people who aren't responsible enough to own a dog wouldn't be able to get there hands on one as easily as they can at the moment.


----------



## moonviolet (Aug 11, 2011)

Ang2 said:


> It keeps getting repeated that the best protection is avoidance. Tell that to the old man and his savaged dog!
> 
> I suggested at the beginning of this thread that I was thinking of carrying a spray, after almost walking into a potentially dangerous situation myself. I was berated for this suggestion, yet it was the only thing that worked in saving the old mans dog. In contrast, the person who used the spray was thanked and praised for their actions. Not one person said they thought it was inappropriate!


I believe the item used was gel, not spray (spray as has been discussed it likely to affect not only the dog you intend to, but the other and quite possibly yourself too.) I don't think anyone berated the poster because they had been through a traumatic experience and had taken the action they deemed necessary as a last resort.

I'll say it again, if serious dog attacks are prevalent in your area light a fire under your dog warden or Designated EHO. (not literally, i'm not condoning burning dog wardens)


----------



## Snoringbear (Sep 26, 2008)

Galadriel17 said:


> Scarter, you seem to think serious dog attacks are common when they really are not.
> 
> Between 2007 and 2008, 4,699 people were admitted to hospital for treatment following a dog bite or strike. Yes strikes are included in the figures too, that means accidental injuries like falling over your dog.
> 
> ...


You're right Child homicides | statistics | NSPCC


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

ouesi said:


> ...I or anyone can sit here & calmly type out the best advice ever, on what to do in a dog fight -
> and the odds of people actually remembering & following that advice in a true emergency are slim to none.


THIS is a huge factor -

U can tell someone repeatedly, _*Don't PULL when a dog is attached by their teeth - 
not on the biter, *Not* on the bitee - but odds are excellent that in the heat of the moment 
& under panic, they will do precisely that: Grab one dog or the other, & yank, causing much-worse 
wounds than the dogs themselves did.*_ :nonod:

in a crisis, only practice will help ppl to do the right "rehearsed" thing - 
otherwise, they react instinctively, which is often the worst-possible response.


----------



## Snoringbear (Sep 26, 2008)

Ang2 said:


> Firstly with regard to Staffies, they are bred for fighting and aggression towards other dogs


There are so many levels where I could argue against this comment that I couldn't begin to start. Just sounds like a Daily Fail soundbite from someone who is absolutely clueless about dogs.


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

Snoringbear said:


> There are so many levels where I could argue against this comment that I couldn't begin to start. Just sounds like a Daily Fail soundbite from someone who is absolutely clueless about dogs.


Well yes and no. It's not as black and white as they are bred for fighting or they aren't bred for fighting. For us to pretend that hundreds of people in the UK are not breeding staffs for dog fighting rings, and using other dogs as bait for these dogs, would be to stick our heads in the sand. I meet one or two new ex-fighting dogs per week around my area of Nottingham, and guess what? They're all staffs or bully breeds. I suppose the ones used as bait as less likely to be seem because they end up being killed, most likely by a staff that has been bred and brought for fighting rings. That's not to say the majority are not bred for fighting though.


----------



## Guest (Jul 21, 2012)

So what if the dogs are bred for fighting other dogs? Why is it that when its *dogs* the dog is bred to fight, NOW all of a sudden its a danger? 
It doesnt make them inherently any more dangerous than a dog bred to hunt fox or a dog bred to hunt boar, or a dog bred to kill mice, a dog bred to protect herds, or a dog bred to attack men. 

The whole these dogs were bred to fight argument makes no sense to me. Theyre still dogs, theyre still trainable, theyre still capable of self-control, impulse control etc. 

All but one of the dogs seized from Michael Vick in the US were rehabilitated and placed in homes. Several went on to be therapy dogs. These dogs are not inherently dangerous.


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

ouesi said:


> So what if the dogs are bred for fighting other dogs? Why is it that when its *dogs* the dog is bred to fight, NOW all of a sudden its a danger?
> It doesnt make them inherently any more dangerous than a dog bred to hunt fox or a dog bred to hunt boar, or a dog bred to kill mice, a dog bred to protect herds, or a dog bred to attack men.
> 
> The whole these dogs were bred to fight argument makes no sense to me. *Theyre still dogs, theyre still trainable, theyre still capable of self-control, impulse control etc. *
> ...


They are, but only in the right hands. There is no problem with any breed of dog, only a minority of owners with bad intentions or lack of knowledge. It doesn't matter if we banned every single bully breed, these people would still exist and would just get their kicks out of another breed, for every breed idiots ruin there's always more out there for them to move on to. That's why, as you say, BSL doesn't work at all.


----------



## Snoringbear (Sep 26, 2008)

Phoolf said:


> Well yes and no. It's not as black and white as they are bred for fighting or they aren't bred for fighting. For us to pretend that hundreds of people in the UK are not breeding staffs for dog fighting rings, and using other dogs as bait for these dogs, would be to stick our heads in the sand. I meet one or two new ex-fighting dogs per week around my area of Nottingham, and guess what? They're all staffs or bully breeds. I suppose the ones used as bait as less likely to be seem because they end up being killed, most likely by a staff that has been bred and brought for fighting rings. That's not to say the majority are not bred for fighting though.


I don't disagree with your comments. The comment I responded to was pretty much one which suggested that all SBTs are all bred to fight.


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

If all bully breeds were banned then the people who want them as status symbols or for fighting would simply move on to another breed. Ban that breed and they'd move on to another. Dobermanns, Rotties and GSDs have all been portrayed the way Staffies are being now. Given the huge increase in the number of idiots getting Sibes and Malamutes it's probably only a matter of time until those breeds get a bad reputation too. 

Either that or these people would continue to illegally breed and own the types of dog they do now. Pit bulls have been banned for god knows how many years but people still apparenty own them.

I've had lots of bad experiences with other dogs and mine. Most of them little handbag type dogs whose owners find it cute and funny when their dog attacks a much larger dog. "Ooooh, he thinks he's a Rottweiler!" is one I've heard so often. Many of them will also bite humans with little to no provocation yet nobody bats an eyelid, they just laugh about it. Yet if a behaviour isn't acceptable in an 80lb dog then it shouldn't be acceptable in an 8lb dog. I've known a lot of staffie who weren't good with other dogs. Most wouldn't race off to start a fight but would react to other dogs getting in their face. Most were also kept under good control by their owners.


----------



## scarter (Apr 26, 2009)

moonviolet said:


> Scarter. i'm glad you seem to have taken on board that banning breeds isn't the answer.


I don't remember saying that. I just don't see the point in arguing about it. I've expressed my view and I appreciate that people are entitled to see things differently from me. Nothing more to say on the topic really. And honestly, before anyone tries to start 'educating' me again - I've heard the arguments against it1000 times before. It just doesn't wash with me.

So, protecting yourself from an attack - and thanks to the people that offered suggestions.

We're hearing then that it depends upon the breed of dog. I guess this makes a lot of sense. An approach that would work well with a little Jack Russell terrier, cocker spaniel etc might not be so effective with a powerful bull terrier or rottie.

So, I think the ones a lot of people find scary is the breeds that clamp down and won't let go. The ones with incredibly powerful jaws. That's the really horrific type of attack for me. But I guess also very scary is the large, powerful breeds with massive jaws and incredible biting power that just keep coming at your poor little dog (or child) and biting - big enough to just pick up your dog (or child), crush it's skull, rip it's limbs off, shake it like a rag doll. The message i'm getting loud and clear about both these types of attack is that whilst you might get the dogs off you'll almost certainly get hurt. So be it. But I see problems if you're alone. I mean, you may well get the dog's jaws unclamped or 'catch' it when it's about to go in for another bite. You get injured in the process. Then you're left with your own terrified injured pet to care for, your own injuries and a furious, powerful, snarling, angry dog to try and keep at bay. We've seen in the links provided that it took 20 min for a man and his wife to get their pet staffie off of him and the man was left in a terrible state. They had to resort to getting a kitchen knife and stabbing their own pet - it was at the stage where it was the man's life or the dog's. Now this wasn't a trained fighting dog - it was a loving pet that had never acted like this before. So once these dogs attack (for whatever reason) they are clearly capable of inflicting dreadful damage - even to a grown man.

Now, if smelling salts, sprays, gels etc would work then that seems better as stories of when they've been used seem to suggest that rather than anger the dog it tends to run off? No guarantees, but it seems better to me than getting into a wrestling match with a killer dog!! Less chance of injury, quicker to get the dog off your poor little baby, and it leaves the scene.

Another option - whilst not legal, but hey - your dog and your life could depend on it. A tazer. A friend of mine brought one back from the states and carries at all times just in case her dog gets attacked again (it's already happened to her once). Or even a knife. It all comes down to 'reasonable force' with humans and I would say the same should be true with canine attackers. Using weapons and chemicals on a little dog that you could reasonably hope to overpower without serious injury might be a bit OTT, but with a large, enraged animal that's equipped to kill and hell bent on doing it.....?


----------



## scarter (Apr 26, 2009)

ouesi said:


> So what if the dogs are bred for fighting other dogs? Why is it that when its *dogs* the dog is bred to fight, NOW all of a sudden its a danger?
> It doesnt make them inherently any more dangerous than a dog bred to hunt fox or a dog bred to hunt boar, or a dog bred to kill mice, a dog bred to protect herds, or a dog bred to attack men.
> 
> The whole these dogs were bred to fight argument makes no sense to me. Theyre still dogs, theyre still trainable, theyre still capable of self-control, impulse control etc.
> ...


I think the point that you are missing is that amongst all breeds there are large numbers of dogs that aren't under good control. Everyone and anyone is allowed to own a dog and most probably don't have the time or the will to put in the amount of training necessary to gain really good control. When a dog bred to hunt mice or foxes reverts to type then, well, it hunts foxes or mice. When a dog bred to fight reverts to type it will fight/attack. And because it has been selectively bred to posses the physique to do well in fights it is capable of inflicting extreme damage. Then you have the others situation where the dog doesn't so much revert to type, but just turns aggressive for some reason. A dog equipped with the tools and temperament for fighting will generally be capable of doing much more damage than an animal bred to hunt small prey.

Now, as far as I understand the history of the Staffy, it's ancestors were used for bear bating and later it was bred for dog fighting. In recent years it was bred for the show ring and as a family pet. Now I'm quite prepared to believe that those bred as family pets/show dogs are generally fine - although you will always get the odd throw back. The most well bred dogs can be aggressive and a staffy will always be better equipped than most to do damage because it still possesses the physique (and tenacity) of a fighting dog. However, the risk presented by the odd throw back and rogue dog is small.

The big problem comes from the dogs that are currently bred for fighting - and perhaps even trained for fighting. Many of these end up in rescues with unknown background then end up in family homes living in close proximity with children and other pets. They might seem 100% fine, but as we keep reading, these pets can just turn without warning and inflict terrible injuries.


----------



## paddyjulie (May 9, 2009)

I'm a bit lost with this thread tbh :lol: it is the weekend so perhaps i will re-read on monday


put Mavis in a room with a yorkie ..I know which one would come out wagging their tail....


it certainly would not be mavis 

and put chester in with a yorkie...well..


----------



## moonviolet (Aug 11, 2011)

This taken from your first post on this thread. Bold added



scarter said:


> If it really comes down to avoidance,* then we must all campaign to have dangerous breeds banned *and owners held fully accountable for the actions of their dogs. !


I knew I wasn't imagining things.

I'm not going to comment on the rest of your post suffice to say I think i would have ended up in some serious trouble if i'd tasered a police officer's pet


----------



## paddyjulie (May 9, 2009)

moonviolet said:


> This taken from your first post on this thread. Bold added
> 
> I knew I wasn't imagining things.
> 
> I'm not going to comment on the rest of your post suffice to say I think i would have ended up in some serious trouble if i'd tasered a police officer's pet


*shakes head* I presume Mavis would be one of these breeds :


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

So where do we draw the line on what would be a "dangerous" breed? Many (all?) of the terriers were bred to kill other animals and despite a lot of them being fairly small dogs they're tenacious and highly prey driven and the ones I know don't let go once they've gotten hold! Yet I don't see anyone calling for Yorkies or JRTs to be put on the dangerous dogs list or banned. Many hounds (Beagles included!) will kill other animals, don't see anyone calling for those to be placed on the dangerous dogs list either. There are breeds who were bred to be guard dogs, should they all be placed on the dangerous dogs list? Shall we ban all the giant breeds just in case they decide to bite since they could easily kill an adult human? I don't understand why you think a dog who hasn't been bred to fight couldn't do just as much, if not more, damage than a staffie. I assure you, they can.

As for the whole "turned without warning"...well I'm afraid I don't believe that is the case in the vast majority of attacks. My dog supposedly attacked with no warning. He didn't growl, he didn't snarl, he didn't bark and I never once saw him raise his hackles or curl his lip but he most certainly did give warning. I've seen plenty of people who think their dogs are fine with something when the dog is screaming out that it is uncomfortable and unhappy. Then if/when the dog snaps or bites they say it happened with no warning :nonod: This is the sort of area where I think education would be HUGELY beneficial because humans quite frankly suck at understanding Dog.


----------



## scarter (Apr 26, 2009)

Sarah1983 said:


> Of course a large dog is going to cause a hell of a lot more damage with each bite than a small one but what do you suggest?
> 
> Banning all but the tiny dogs?
> Keeping anything above a certain size leashed and muzzled?


Pretty much everyone in this country is allowed to own a dog - a dog of any kind. It doesn't matter how intelligent they are, whether they can afford the dog, whether they have criminal tendencies, whether they have adequate facilities for the dog, whether they have time to train the dog, whether they're strong enough to control the dog....and so on. Not necessarily 'chavs' and criminals, but also people that just don't have the time and facilities needed to properly control the dog.

There are lots of people in our society that, if they get hold of a dog that has potential to inflict significant harm (due to aggression levels, tenacity, physical attributes) then this would be an extremely dangerous situation that would put innocent people and pets at great risk.

I see two broad options:

1. License dog ownership and ensure that people are only able to own a dog that they demonstrate they can keep and control without putting anyone at risk. (Don't be under any illusions - this too will result in the death of many, many dogs as already there aren't enough homes to go around). Alternatively you could make the penalties for dog attacks so high (prison sentences) that people were terrified to own a dog that they weren't certain they could properly control.

OR

2. Ban all dogs that have the potential to be highly dangerous in the wrong hands (due to aggression levels, tenacity, physical attributes). So as with guns, ban them completely and that greatly reduces the risk. Yes, people still get guns but not nearly as many people. We have much less gun crime here than in America (where guns are legal).



> Would you still be as open to legislation against certain breeds if it meant your own dogs would be seized and killed?


Almost certainly not. I love my dogs and would die for them. I too would probably try to argue that the breed wasn't dangerous, that attacks didn't happen - the kids must have provoked the dog, that my particular breed was no more dangerous than a teacup yorkie, that banning the breed wouldn't work, that I could control them, that it was about education and so on. I would be in complete denial - I'd do anything to protect my dogs.

I do think that an outright ban (i.e. we're taking your dogs away from you and killing them) would be too cruel. Wouldn't be in favour of that. I think a gradual process (i.e. licensing existing dogs and outlawing breeding). I think Pit Bulls are a far more dangerous breed than staffies. Yet we don't get many Pit Bull attacks because we have very few Pit bulls in this country. They are illegal.



> Education is what's needed, not more laws that nobody will follow and that won't be enforced.


The trouble with that is that some people just aren't smart enough to be educated - or simply don't agree with what you're trying to teach them. Education won't have any effect on the people that are the biggest problem. Think about this seriously - do you think if we made guns legal and educated the entire population as to how to use them safely it would be as effective as making ownership of guns illegal (without a license)?


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

scarter said:


> 1. License dog ownership and ensure that people are only able to own a dog that they demonstrate they can keep and control without putting anyone at risk. (Don't be under any illusions - this too will result in the death of many, many dogs as already there aren't enough homes to go around).
> 
> I like the idea of licensing in principal, but just have no idea how this would be enforced practically - responsible owners and breeders would go through the required processes; the irresponsible will just ignore the requirement I'm sure.
> 
> ...


Part of the problem for me in your 'banned list' suggestion taking into account aggression levels, physical attributes, tenacity - how would you measure these and how large a sample of each breed would you have tested before you banned a whole breed, bearing in mind some breeds are numerically small?


----------



## scarter (Apr 26, 2009)

One problem that keeps coming up whenever there is a series of attacks on other dogs; attacks on people on private property; dogs that people fear but as of yet nothing has happened; the police can't act. Even when the dangerous dog act applies it can be a bit wooly.

Licensing makes things simpler with those that act outwith the law. The little chav doesn't have a licence. No problem - the dog is taken off the streets. You don't have to wait for someone (or someone's dog) to get hurt before action is taken.

I have to say I've never seen a Pit Bull. I'm going by reports of attacks in the US. I have read that staffies are much more placid dogs in the US because they all come from show lines - none are from fighting lines. So maybe that's the case with Pit Bulls? The UK Pit Bulls were bred to be dangerous?

This would seem to be the case with staffies - the ones bred by good breeders are fine. But the vast majority of staffies in this county have been bred by bad breeders and are essentially a very different dog. What do you do - ban all staffies that don't have papers proving that they are of the 'safe' variety? I do take on board what people are saying about breeds becoming victims of bad breeders that see it's potential as a fighting or status dog. But once the dogs start going through the rehoming shelters how do you tell them apart? I'm sure any breed can have the dangerous tendencies bred out in time if you have enough control over breeding programs.



> Nor will the law - or there wouldn't be such a trade in dogs of 'type' already.


There is a trade in guns (which are illegal) yet we have less gun crime than they do in the US where guns are legal. I think the problem with dangerous dogs would be far worse without the bans. The 4 banned breeds were presumably breeds of choice amongst dog fighting circles etc? Presumably they showed best potential to do damage? Those that want to breed dogs for fighting etc will choose breeds that have the best attributes. The dogs that already have the best potential for fighting.



Dogless said:


> Part of the problem for me in your 'banned list' suggestion taking into account aggression levels, physical attributes, tenacity - how would you measure these and how large a sample of each breed would you have tested before you banned a whole breed, bearing in mind some breeds are numerically small?


I think you know when there's a problem. When a dog is so extremely dangerous that they put people around them at extreme risk or when a breed has a high tendency towards harming other people/pets and there are huge numbers of them. I agree it will normally be dictated by those that breed dogs for fighting/status etc.


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

scarter said:


> Licensing makes things simpler with those that act outwith the law. The little chav doesn't have a licence. No problem - the dog is taken off the streets. You don't have to wait for someone (or someone's dog) to get hurt before action is taken.
> 
> But so many people ignore the requirement to have a license - they do in NI where it is a legal requirement and I have never seen anyone enforce it when I go to busier areas.
> 
> I think you know when there's a problem. When a dog is so extremely dangerous that they put people around them at extreme risk or when a breed has a high tendency towards harming other people/pets and there are huge numbers of them. I agree it will normally be dictated by those that breed dogs for fighting/status etc.


A poorly controlled and dangerous single dog is very different to banning entire breeds. When you talk about banning entire breeds it is how you obtain and collate the information identifying those who have a high tendency towards harming people and pets that bothers me - how do you measure the tenacity and aggressiveness you talk about? Where will you get your dog - dog attack info as so many are unreported? Numerically more common breeds feature on hospital stats very much more than rarer ones obviously - but the frequency with which they appear doesn't necessarily mean that they are more likely to attack that a rarer breed surely - just that far more people and pets come into contact with them.

I am guessing that RRs would be on your banned list; yet the only breeds that have so far drawn any blood from him have been labs, a JRT, a bichon and a Border Terrier. None of those dogs have been left with any injuries themselves and I am having to put a lot of work in due to wariness of labs now - yet I am guessing labs wouldn't be on your banned list?


----------



## moonviolet (Aug 11, 2011)

scarter as I noticed you are in Scotland I took a look at the Control of dogs law for Scotland.

The control of dogs(Scotland) act 2010

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2010/9/pdfs/asp_20100009_en.pdf

A breakdown of 2011 amendments
Control of Dogs (Scotland) Act Information - New dog law passed in Scotland

Which part of this legislation do you feel is inadequate?


----------



## Guest (Jul 21, 2012)

Dogs are not guns. Nobody ever trained a gun to go to hospitals and do therapy work, no one ever had a seeing-eye gun. Dogs are sentient, intelligent, thinking beings.

Besides, if people want to hurt someone, they will find a way, be it with a gun, a knife, a fist, or dog trained intentionally or unintentionally to bite. Sadly its not that hard to turn a dog in to a fear biter.
Violent crimes are already illegal, I dont see the fact that it is stopping those who are truly violent. You dont see a serial killer saying oh, wait, I best not do this, its illegal." Laws only affect the law abiding.
In this thread alone, there have been a couple ILLEGAL suggestions. Clearly the that law doesnt apply to me mentality is alive and well.

There seems to be a lot of fear mongering going on too. 


scarter said:


> But I guess also very scary is the large, powerful breeds with massive jaws and incredible biting power that just keep coming at your poor little dog (or child) and biting - big enough to just pick up your dog (or child), crush it's skull, rip it's limbs off, shake it like a rag doll.


I really laughed out loud reading the above. Ripping limbs off? Good grief! Are we talking great white sharks here or dogs?

I have lived my entire life with GSDs, rhodesians, labs, great danes, a malamute, large mutts of all sorts of questionable backgrounds, and I have kept all my limbs as have my children despite the fact that our most recent rescue is a 140 pound great dane with a bite history who had been running feral and was snacking on the local goat farmers herd. He still has the lead in his body to prove it.

Dogs have evolved ALONGSIDE of man for millennia. They are not wild animals who will revert to eating us at the slightest provocation. They are domestic, companion animals who are better able to recognize human faces and expressions than our closest great ape cousins. Yes, dogs communicate better with humans than chimps do.

Are there horror stories out there sensationalized by the media? Oh yeah. But what about all the other stories of dogs who have suffered the most horrific abuse and torture who still refuse to lay a tooth on their tormentors? Those of us who work in rescue deal with this all the time. Dogs who have been shot, beaten, starved, neglected, who have suffered the most unspeakable treatment at the hands of humans who not only recover but go on to be perfectly safe, dependable, trustworthy, model doggy citizens. THIS is the truth about dogs. Over and over I have personally experienced, heard about, and participated in dogs going from terrorized messes to model citizens. Yet never have I heard of a dog ripping limbs off unless it was an unsubstantiated media sensationalization.

No other animal puts up with what dogs do without retaliation except maybe horses even in simple every day interactions. I see dogs routinely hit, kicked, jerked on choke chains, swatted with newspaper, sprayed with water, shocked with collars etc. etc. And yet how rarely does this type of treatment result in harm to the person doing it? Like Dunbar says, wag your finger in a bears face and say no no and see how well that works out for you. 
But dogs by and large dont retaliate. Yet here we are talking about dangerous breeds and dangerous dogs. The dogs arent the dangerous ones.

Its frustrating and sad. I think Im just going to go hug my dogs now....


----------



## Galadriel17 (Jan 22, 2012)

scarter said:


> ...I see two broad options:
> 
> 1. License dog ownership and ensure that people are only able to own a dog that they demonstrate they can keep and control without putting anyone at risk. (Don't be under any illusions - this too will result in the death of many, many dogs as already there aren't enough homes to go around). Alternatively you could make the penalties for dog attacks so high (prison sentences) that people were terrified to own a dog that they weren't certain they could properly control.
> 
> ...


Scarter, I despair at your naivety, I really do. I have not the energy nor the time to address everything you've said so I'll just reply to the above suggestions.

Licensing does not work. It simply affects those that are already responsible and the irresponsible just carry on regardless. We do not have the money to enforce it properly. Even if we did have the huge amount of money spare to properly enforce licensing, it wouldn't be spent on something which statistically is such an insignificant danger to people, instead, it would be much better spent on something like making our roads safer where hundreds of thousands of people are killed or injured each year.

As for prison sentences, we don't even have the room or the money to lock up people that commit serious crime against other people for long enough. Even if we did have the space and money, prison sentences don't deter those intent on causing harm anyway, if they did then the heinous crimes that take place every day wouldn't happen.

And as for banning all dogs that have the potential to be highly dangerous in the wrong hands; that would be all dogs then? Or do you still fail to see that all dogs can be dangerous? In which case how would you decide on which dogs to ban? Would it be entire breeds or individual dogs?

If it's entire breeds then how do you fail to see the huge problems with that? Not to mention the fact it's already been proven not to work and the fact it's akin to racism. Which breeds would you ban? Remember there are many, many breeds with a bigger bite force than a SBT, the Labrador being just one.

If its individual dogs then how do you assess who's dangerous and who's not? You only need to look at the Lennox case to see that people don't agree, one person assessed him and called him dangerous then another two experts did the same and found him not to be dangerous.


----------



## scarter (Apr 26, 2009)

Galadriel17 said:


> Scarter, I despair at your naivety, I really do.


That won't do - can't have you in despair!! :001_smile:

So for arguments sake then, lets accept that licensing, stiff penalties and banning of certain breeds is naive. The only other solution offered up is 'education' which at best can only provide a partial solution to preventing dog attacks on our innocent pets (and children). The worst offenders won't be educated, and lets face it, many who consider themselves responsible probably don't see anything wrong with their dog occasionally attacking another dog. Whilst we personally can protect our pets by being very careful where we take them, teaching them to behave in ways that will make them less likely to be attacked, avoiding certain dogs/types of dog/types of owner etc, that won't always be enough. Especially if you live in an area where dog on dog attacks is more common.

Maybe one day the problem will be solved by one or more of the above methods, but until then we have to do what we can to keep our pets safe. Until that day unprovoked attacks on our pets (often fatal) is a reality - something that will happen/has happened to some of us.

So, lets do something that we can do and start educating each other about how to deal with an unprovoked attack on your dog. You've done all you can to avoid an attack but it's happened anyway. There will be lots of different ideas so lets discuss the pros and cons.

Imagine, you're walking along the road with your dog, minding your own business when suddenly a dog (of any breed) runs out of a house, leaps over a garden wall and sinks it's jaws into your dog's throat. Or maybe there are two attacking dogs and they start a tug of war with your dog - ripping at his limbs. Your dog is terrified, screaming in terror and unable to fight back. You are alone and the owner of the attacking dog(s) is nowhere to be seen. (This actually happened to a friend of mine - two dogs attacking in her case).

With another friend the attack took place after the walk and back at the car. They were putting the dogs back in the boot when a lone dog ran over and launched a vicious attack on the little spaniel still waiting to get into the car.

So, how best to defend your dog in these situations?

We've heard that with Bully breeds you really need a break stick to prize their jaws open. With 'knife attackers' using a spare lead to loop around the dog and pull it away. Also choking the dog with a spare lead has been suggested. However, we're told that we'll almost certainly be attacked and injured ourselves using these approaches. Also, what do you do once you've got the dog off? It's no doubt pretty pee'd off at you and your pet by now; you're injured; your pet is injured - a pretty tricky situation.

Was it on this thread someone suggested carrying a stout wooden walking stick?

Others have suggested that carrying some kind of substance to repel the dog. So smelling salts, ammonia, hairspray and so on. This seems more sensible to me....if it's likely to work and cause the dog to run off. (I know all of these subastances would frighten my dogs off!). Certainly it seems safer to human, quicker (so less injury for the dog being attacked) and less risky for the dog you're trying to frighten off. Lets face it, if the attacking dog bites you then chances are it'll be destroyed so if you give a damn about the other dog you don't want the human getting hurt! Of course, you could look at it the other way - if your dog is the only one to get hurt it's unlikely that anything will be done to stop this dog attacking again. If you get bitten....?

And then there's the more extreme (and illegal) approach of carrying a weapon. So a tazer, a knife. But if smelling salts won't work, you don't think you could wrestle off a large angry dog, then, if you feel that there are too many dangerous dogs in the areas you walk it might be the best option? The only way to have a chance of keeping your pet safe? Of course, huge problems if people feel the need to go down this route. You can imagine the weapons getting used on people as the owner of the attacking dog tries to protect his pet (who in their eyes is perhaps only doing what comes naturally).


----------



## Guest (Jul 23, 2012)

Education does work, but it takes time.
30 years ago in this country nobody thought twice about buying a dog from a pet store, now pretty much anyone who hasnt been living under a rock knows not to.
30 years ago dogs had their noses rubbed in poop and were swatted with rolled up newspaper to potty train, now pretty much everyone who hasnt been living under a rock knows not to do that.

Im not going to get in to more suggestions as to what to do in a real dog fight because a) its beginning to feel like this is not really about what to do but to continue to paint a sensationalistic picture of these savage limb tearing dogs  
Also b) as Ive already said, in a true emergency, unless you are very experienced and practiced with dog fights, and are capable of rational thought in an emergency, all the knowledge in the world isnt going to do you any good because people panic and either sit there wringing their hands doing nothing, or jump in and take actions that make things worse. 
Finally c) Im incredibly uncomfortable with the continued suggestions on a public forum that are in fact illegal in the UK.

Personally, I think time is better spent educating and learning about canine CPR and first aid and TRAINING, in case a dog gets loose, blows off his recall, and gets hit by a car, or otherwise injured which is frankly far more likely than a dog getting ripped to shreds by another dog.


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

ouesi said:


> Education does work, but it takes time.
> 30 years ago in this country nobody thought twice about buying a dog from a pet store, now pretty much anyone who hasnt been living under a rock knows not to.
> 30 years ago dogs had their noses rubbed in poop and were swatted with rolled up newspaper to potty train, now pretty much everyone who hasnt been living under a rock knows not to do that.
> 
> ...


Here's a question for you along the CPR/first aid training route. What if I was out hiking with my dog and she collapsed and I had to carry her a mile or so back to the car and get her medical attention. She's very heavy, is there some kind of sling you can buy to carry an injured dog?


----------



## Guest (Jul 23, 2012)

Phoolf said:


> Here's a question for you along the CPR/first aid training route. What if I was out hiking with my dog and she collapsed and I had to carry her a mile or so back to the car and get her medical attention. She's very heavy, is there some kind of sling you can buy to carry an injured dog?


Thats an excellent question and one that us giant breed owners wrestle with. What to do if you have to move/carry a dog that often weighs more than you do?

Yes, there are slings for dogs. (Google animal stretchers or animal medical equipment.) 
If you are near a house, you can make a makeshift stretcher out of broom handles and towels, but you would need 2 people to carry the stretcher obviously.
Honestly I think what I would do if I couldnt carry the dog is leave the dog to go find help. Also I never go anywhere without a cell phone, so you can also call for help.


----------



## moonviolet (Aug 11, 2011)

I'm not sure if you read the legislation links i posted earlier Scotland has tougher laws than England.

DDA applies on private property as well as in public places and DCN ( dog control notices can be served if in the following situations and includes Dog on dog!

What is a Dog Control Notice?

_A DCN will be served in Scotland by an authorised officer (officer appointed by the local authority-i.e. a dog warden) if a dog has, on at least one occasion, been out of control. The written notice will require that the person brings and keeps the dog under control. A dog is out of control if -

it is not being kept under control effectively and consistently (by whatever means) by the proper person. (Proper person is defined as either the dog's owner or head of household if owner under 16yrs of age or someone who appears to have the day-to-day charge of the dog if the owner is not apparent.) 
its behaviour gives rise to - 
(i) alarm, or
(ii) apprehensiveness

On the part of any individual, and

c) the individual's alarm or apprehensive is, in all the circumstances, reasonable.

The new law adds further meaning to the 'apprehensiveness' and states that this may be as to-

the individual's own safety 
the safety of some other person, or 
*the safety of an animal other than the dog in question *_

These are the section 3 penalties

_DDA Section 3 Penalties:

In cases where no injury has been caused to a person, the case will be heard before the magistrate's court. *If found guilty there is a maximum sentence of 6 months imprisonment and/or a fine of up to £5,000.*

In cases where any Injury has been caused to a person - an aggravated offence, the case can either be heard before the magistrates' court or the crown court. *If found guilty there is a maximum penalty of 2 years imprisonment and/or a fine of up to £20,000. *

If injury has been caused to a person there is a presumption in favour of destruction of the dog unless the owner can prove to the court that the dog is not a danger to public safety. The alternative to a destruction order is a Contingent Destruction Order - conditions can be attached to such an order e.g., providing the owner obeys the order and what it stipulates the dog is allowed to live._

*emphasis added*
All information applies to Scotland as sourced and quoted from Control of Dogs (Scotland) Act Information - New dog law passed in Scotland

Are these measures not enough?


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

ouesi said:


> Thats an excellent question and one that us giant breed owners wrestle with. What to do if you have to move/carry a dog that often weighs more than you do?
> 
> Yes, there are slings for dogs. (Google animal stretchers or animal medical equipment.)
> If you are near a house, you can make a makeshift stretcher out of broom handles and towels, but you would need 2 people to carry the stretcher obviously.
> Honestly I think what I would do if I couldnt carry the dog is leave the dog to go find help. Also I never go anywhere without a cell phone, so you can also call for help.


:thumbsup:

I always worry about this when I'm in a pretty isolated area, it's why I always try and get my OH to come with me on long walks. I think I would just have to struggle with carrying rather than leave her anywhere. I'm going to look up slings now and get one in my emergency backpack.


----------



## scarter (Apr 26, 2009)

> Personally, I think time is better spent educating and learning about canine CPR and first aid and TRAINING, in case a dog gets loose, blows off his recall, and gets hit by a car, or otherwise injured which is frankly far more likely than a dog getting ripped to shreds by another dog.


I think a discussion on that topic is an excellent idea and I'd be happy to contribute, but no one interested in that kind of thing is going to find it in a topic entitled "Protection from Attack". Why not start a new thread - it could save a dog's life?

As could THIS discussion on how to save your dog from an unprovoked dog attack.

Let me be clear - we're not talking about fights (as you seem to prefer to view it) - we're talking about unprovoked, savage attacks. People are genuinely horrified at the thought of their dog being stolen and used as bait/training for fighting dogs. Yet when it happens on our streets - when a pet DA dog gets loose and savages someone's pet - ripping it apart while it's owner looks on helplessly then suddenly people want to pretend it doesn't happen and take the discussion off topic.

Sadly, despite all the laws in place (even in Scotland), attempts at education and so on these attacks are still happening all to often.

No, not nice. I can understand why some want to stick their heads in the sand and pretend it doesn't happen. But it does happen. And it's not all down to 'chavs' as many would have us believe. A lot of the time it's normal people (people that consider themselves responsible) that happen to have dog aggressive dog. They don't want to restrict their pet's lives too much so take chances and someone elses pet pays the price with it's life. My guess is that many people KNOW they are playing russion roulette with other peoples pets. They don't want to see someone elses pet hurt or killed, but they want to enjoy life with their dog and will take risks. Many of them won't want to see laws that hold them accountable or force them to better control their pets as that will make life difficult.

Regardless of why it happens and what kind of owner is responsible, when it happens then how you react as an owner could determine whether your pet lives or dies. So (assuming you plan to do everything in your power to get the attacking dog off) - do you carry a break stick, stout walking stick, spare lead, smelling salts, knife?

Good advice not to just pull the attacking dog off when it's jaws are still clamped around your dog. Best way to get them unclamped then?


----------



## Phoolf (Jun 13, 2012)

scarter said:


> Good advice not to just pull the attacking dog off when it's jaws are still clamped around your dog. *Best way to get them unclamped then?*


No idea but I carry round perfume or deo spray just incase, I think that would probably work. I'm not really too bothered about whether the dog in question gets hurt from it. When it's my dog or theirs I only care about mine.

As for carrying a knife or anything silly like that that seems like a stupid idea for so many reasons. One you could get put in prison for carrying it and secondly it won't work, you can stab a dog and it won't even notice if its in fight mode. And if it does notice it would clamp its jaws on you and injure you pretty badly.


----------



## pogo (Jul 25, 2011)

scarter said:


> Good advice not to just pull the attacking dog off when it's jaws are still clamped around your dog. Best way to get them unclamped then?


TBH i don't think there is a 'best' method, I would never use break sticks, but whatever method you use even if it means you may hurt your dog (like when i hit Chance) if it means stopping the fight then so be it.


----------



## Guest (Jul 23, 2012)

scarter said:


> Let me be clear - we're not talking about fights (as you seem to prefer to view it) - we're talking about unprovoked, savage attacks. People are genuinely horrified at the thought of their dog being stolen and used as bait/training for fighting dogs. Yet when it happens on our streets - when a pet DA dog gets loose and savages someone's pet - ripping it apart while it's owner looks on helplessly then suddenly people want to pretend it doesn't happen and take the discussion off topic.


I have lived in 5 different countries with different dogs for over 40 years. In that time I have NEVER experienced an attack to the extent youre talking about. These unprovoked, savage attacks. How many of them have you personally experienced? Or are these all based on hearsay and what youve read in The Sun? Im not saying they dont happen, I just dont think its the pressing issue you seem to think it is.



scarter said:


> No, not nice. I can understand why some want to stick their heads in the sand and pretend it doesn't happen. But it does happen. And it's not all down to 'chavs' as many would have us believe. A lot of the time it's normal people (people that consider themselves responsible) that happen to have dog aggressive dog. They don't want to restrict their pet's lives too much so take chances and someone elses pet pays the price with it's life. My guess is that many people KNOW they are playing russion roulette with other peoples pets. They don't want to see someone elses pet hurt or killed, but they want to enjoy life with their dog and will take risks. Many of them won't want to see laws that hold them accountable or force them to better control their pets as that will make life difficult.
> 
> Regardless of why it happens and what kind of owner is responsible, when it happens then how you react as an owner could determine whether your pet lives or dies. So (assuming you plan to do everything in your power to get the attacking dog off) - do you carry a break stick, stout walking stick, spare lead, smelling salts, knife?
> 
> Good advice not to just pull the attacking dog off when it's jaws are still clamped around your dog. Best way to get them unclamped then?


Sticking heads in the sand? Playing russian roulette with other peoples pets? Are you trying to be this offensive, or are you really that ignorant of dog behavior? 
Far more dogs get injured and killed from lack of training than anything else.
I love how its the people whos own dogs have iffy training who are the most vocal about BSL. People need to start worrying about their own dogs and their responsibilities to their own dogs, instead of trying pass the buck on to every other dog out there who isnt 100% controlled.


----------



## L/C (Aug 9, 2010)

I don't think we should be encouraging owners to start carrying illegal weapons (knife/tazer) as that is incredibly irresponsible and the vast majority of owners can't tell the difference between handbags and a real attack.

I live in a densely dog populated area where 'status dogs' owned by frankly unaware and irresponsible owners abound. I moved here from an area even more densely dog populated which was a lot rougher. I have seen some truly awful dog handling and rearing and I have been involved in four dog 'fights', 3 where my dog was the victim and one where he was the aggressor. In only one of those fights was any dog realistically intent on harm and luckily the dog was muzzled (not my own); in the others there was a lot of noise, screaming, slobber and fur flying but no damage or broken skin. I have a greyhound so for a dog to attack him and _not_ break the skin speaks of very good bite inhibition. If someone attacked my dog with a knife or tazer in those situations I would have them prosecuted as fully as I could for carrying an illegal and dangerous weapon in public.

_Serious dog on dog attacks are rare. _ Encouraging people to carry a knife as a counter measure is the height of stupidity and makes me very angry. I live in an area of high knife crime - if a fellow dog walker confided in me that they carried a knife as protection I would report them to the police without hesitation.


----------



## Galadriel17 (Jan 22, 2012)

Scarter, I'm starting to find your obsession with 'unprovoked, savage attacks' a little concerning. Yes, they happen but they are rare and your pet being attacked is just a chance you take by owning a pet, in the same way you take a chance that you might be involved in a road traffic accident if you travel in a car (although the later is much more likely).

Do you drive? Do you know what to do should you loose control of your car? Do you have a plan if you wake up in the middle of the night and your house is on fire? Do you know how to defend yourself from a mugger in the street? Do you know what to do if you're walking in the countryside and a herd of cattle decide to stampede? I could go on and on here.

I don't know what it is you're trying to get at or what you want me or anyone else to say? If you want to know how to break up a dog fight then have a read through the thread and see if there are any (legal) suggestions that take your fancy.


----------



## Angels_Sin (Dec 16, 2008)

Snoringbear said:


> Dogs don't attack or do anything else without a reason. Unprovoked seems to be used in any incident where the victim hasn't made some kind of active threat or harm towards the dog. There are plenty of other passive means of provoking a dog which humans are incapable of either noticing or understanding - staring them down, removing toys/food, intruding upon a territorial dogs property etc for example.


I'm sorry but that's not always true. There is a staffy in my area that's seriously dog aggressive yet the owners still let it off lead. I was in the park with my dog at the weekend and she was sniffing around next to a stream where she sometimes flushes out rats. She was minding her own business and hadn't even seen this staff come into the park. I'd seen the staff but my eyesight isn't too good so I wasn't sure if it was the aggressive one or not, but it was playful and bouncy so I wasn't worried. Then she spotted Kas, she was suddenly focused on her and her body went stiff. The owner called her but instead of going to him, she ran for Kas, who still hadn't even seen her at this point and was just sniffing the bushes. I went over, quickly but not running and Kas by this stage had seen the dog and without making eye contact (which is exactly what guide dogs are trained to do in order to help not to be attacked), she slowly started to walk behind me. At this point the Staffy lunged at her, luckily I managed to grab its collar and hold her there until the owner finally came over to get her. My dog did NOTHING to provoke that reaction, it's just an aggressive dog that gets no kind of corrections for its behaviour and has taken chunks out of other dogs in the past, so its not just a handbags at dawn thing.

I'm sure in your mind I did something wrong or missed some sign, or something bad that my dog did, but frankly Im not an idiot and it's insulting to blame the owner of the dog being attacked for someone elses bad ownership.

Now maybe you could argue that the staff does have her own reasons, her owner tells me she was attacked in the past, so lets even say that that is why she's aggressive. She still attacked my dog who did NOTHING wrong so as far as I'm concerned, there was NO REASON for the attack.


----------



## Snoringbear (Sep 26, 2008)

Angels_Sin said:


> I'm sorry but that's not always true. There is a staffy in my area that's seriously dog aggressive yet the owners still let it off lead. I was in the park with my dog at the weekend and she was sniffing around next to a stream where she sometimes flushes out rats. She was minding her own business and hadn't even seen this staff come into the park. I'd seen the staff but my eyesight isn't too good so I wasn't sure if it was the aggressive one or not, but it was playful and bouncy so I wasn't worried. Then she spotted Kas, she was suddenly focused on her and her body went stiff. The owner called her but instead of going to him, she ran for Kas, who still hadn't even seen her at this point and was just sniffing the bushes. I went over, quickly but not running and Kas by this stage had seen the dog and without making eye contact (which is exactly what guide dogs are trained to do in order to help not to be attacked), she slowly started to walk behind me. At this point the Staffy lunged at her, luckily I managed to grab its collar and hold her there until the owner finally came over to get her. My dog did NOTHING to provoke that reaction, it's just an aggressive dog that gets no kind of corrections for its behaviour and has taken chunks out of other dogs in the past, so its not just a handbags at dawn thing.
> 
> I'm sure in your mind I did something wrong or missed some sign, or something bad that my dog did, but frankly Im not an idiot and it's insulting to blame the owner of the dog being attacked for someone elses bad ownership.
> 
> *Now maybe you could argue that the staff does have her own reasons*, her owner tells me she was attacked in the past, so lets even say that that is why she's aggressive. She still attacked my dog who did NOTHING wrong so as far as I'm concerned, there was NO REASON for the attack.


As an example, I have one dog who always has had a terrible temperament as a puppy and has and still is fearful of the majority of things in life. She spent the first few years of her life trying to keep as far from any dog she met or being traumatised by off lead friendly dogs charging after her. One day that changed and she discovered that an aggressive offensive with a lot of barking and lunging kept an unwanted dog away. She ran the entire length of a football pitch and charged up to a distant greyhound and barked repeatedly at it from a few meters away, before running back to me. Given the opportunity I know she would do this with any dog she sees, regardless of that dog's action. Her reaction is a response to her fear, that is her provocation.


----------



## L/C (Aug 9, 2010)

Angels_Sin said:


> Now maybe you could argue that the staff does have her own reasons, her owner tells me she was attacked in the past, so let's even say that that is why she's aggressive. She still attacked my dog who did NOTHING wrong so as far as I'm concerned, there was NO REASON for the attack.


Just because Kes didn't provoke her doesn't mean there wasn't a reason. If she was attacked before it suggests that in that staff's head that a pre-emptive strike is best to make sure the other dog doesn't get her first. That's a reason. It doesn't mean that Kes provoked her - just that she's developed a response that keeps her safe (in her head). In that case it's unforgivable that her owners do not keep her on a lead.

ETA: X-post with Snoringbear.


----------



## Angels_Sin (Dec 16, 2008)

But Bear, the difference is that's your dog trying to keep others away, which I understand. This was a dog that was perfectly happy until she spotted my dog, which wasn't even looking at her or aware of her, and she went after her, crossing half a playing field to get to her. I don't see how that can be a defensive action.

The reason I doubt the explanation that this Staff was attacked in the past is because the lad told me she has a problem with dogs that look like my dog because this was the type that attacked her. I know for a fact however that she's taken a chuck out of the side of a Lurcher and almost killed a Yorkshire Terrier. I honestly think he was making excuses for the dogs behaviour because he was embarrised and at the time I was so shaken (it didn't occur to me until this point that the dog easily could have turned its aggression on me) that I didn't really question it. Plus, with this lad, he does at least sort of try. His Dad on the other hand is a different story. It's not the first time we've had trouble with this dog and once when ours was playing with a couple of others it came over, went for one of the dogs, my partner ended up having to pick it up by one leg (awful I know but it was a moment of panic) as someone else had been bitten by it. Even though they were all shouting at this guy to come and get his dog, he walked past like he really couldn't care less, didn't even say sorry, in fact, didn't say a word.

I do understand the fear reaction, thanks to this dog and its idiot owners, my dog is now nervous around new dogs and I worry that if I can't find a way to put a stop to it now, it could turn to aggression. But that aggression should only be displayed if she feels threatened and this staffy was not in the slightest bit threatened. My point is, its not really relevant what the dog might have gone through in the past, at that moment, an attack like the one Ive outlined IS unprovoked.


----------



## Angels_Sin (Dec 16, 2008)

I just looked at my first post again and realise I might have sounded a bit aggressive myself! I'm sorry if I did, it's just thinking about what happened at the weekend still makes me angry and nervous - I've got to walk her there again tonight and I'm just going to be on the look out for this idiot and his dog again for the whole time  I don't know why they won't at least muzzle it.


----------



## moonviolet (Aug 11, 2011)

Angels_Sin said:


> I just looked at my first post again and realise I might have sounded a bit aggressive myself! I'm sorry if I did, it's just thinking about what happened at the weekend still makes me angry and nervous - I've got to walk her there again tonight and I'm just going to be on the look out for this idiot and his dog again for the whole time  I don't know why they won't at least muzzle it.


I understand totally where you are coming from. Have you spoken to the dog warden/Designated EHO they really can't be blamed for not doing anything if they aren't told. If you report the incident, you my find they have previous incidents on record and this becomes sufficient for them to consider progressing a dog control order.


----------



## scarter (Apr 26, 2009)

Galadriel17 said:


> Yes, they happen [unprovoked, savage attacks] but they are rare and your pet being attacked is just a chance you take by owning a pet.


It puzzles me why anyone would have an issue with people wanting to discuss the best course of action to take in this kind of situation. But each to their own - I have no desire whatsoever to convert you to my way of thinking. :001_smile:



Phoolf said:


> No idea but I carry round perfume or deo spray just incase, I think that would probably work. I'm not really too bothered about whether the dog in question gets hurt from it. When it's my dog or theirs I only care about mine.


At Malmum's suggestion we ordered two bottles of MacKenzies smelling salts - one each. They arrived this morning. The smell certainly gives you a jolt so I'm certain with any normal dog they'd have the desired effect. I believe she read about using ammonia on a Pitt Bull forum where people had successfully used it to get a Pitt Bull to loosen it's bite on an other dog so you would hope that it'd help in most situations. It's certainly small and easy to carry and legal! Those with experience of this type of thing - do you think amonia is likely to work?



pogo said:


> TBH i don't think there is a 'best' method, I would never use break sticks, but whatever method you use even if it means you may hurt your dog (like when i hit Chance) if it means stopping the fight then so be it.


Is there a reason you don't use break sticks (i.e. a drawback that you know of). Or just personal preference?

I do think it's very helpful to hear different peoples' thinking on this - especially from people that own large, powerful dog aggressive (or people aggressive) dogs. They will have a totally different understanding of what might work than those that own little dogs that are easily brought under control.

I have an acquaintance with two large, powerful dogs. One is very dog (and to a lesser extent people) aggressive. She freely admits that if anything were to happen she'd be powerless to control the dogs - they're too big and strong. So she hopes that her training will prevent disaster - she takes a lot of precautions and certainly doesn't let the dog run free. She considers herself very responsible and I suspect most people would agree with her. Mostly her precautions do work, although there have been incidents and other dogs have been badly hurt. Her view is that there's nothing you can do - you just need to hope the other dog isn't killed and be willing to pay the vet bills. I do wonder if her decision to keep the dog might change if there were serious consequences for her when the dog injured or killed someone elses pet - but that's another matter entirely!

I think the reality is that few owners could just stand by and watch their dogs die. People typically would give their lives to save their dogs - I know I would (and this is no doubt the reason why people keep dogs that are dangerous to other animals and impossible to reliably control - I can sympathize with this - but not condone it.). This is the thing that I think the law forgets - dogs are very precious to their owners - as much so as children. I'm sure you can appreciate that someone who's only dog experience is with a lap dog is simply not going to have a clue how to go about protecting their dog from a large, dog aggressive animal that, once started, will refuse to let go until it's victim is dead. Yet they have to do something - they can't just stand by and watch their baby die in pain and terror.

People can go to self-defence classes to help improve their chances in the rare case of savage attack by out or control aggressive humans. I don't think anyone runs dog defense classes that equip you to deal with an attack from an out of control dog aggressive dog!


----------



## pogo (Jul 25, 2011)

I don't use them for 1. personal preference, 2. they can cause unnecessary damage, 3. do you want to be putting your hand that close to an attacking dogs teeth?

I also don't believe they work and certainly wouldn't in our incident


----------



## L/C (Aug 9, 2010)

scarter said:


> It puzzles me why anyone would have an issue with people wanting to discuss the best course of action to take in this kind of situation. But each to their own - I have no desire whatsoever to convert you to my way of thinking. :001_smile:


Perhaps because of responses like this?



scarter said:


> *And then there's the more extreme (and illegal) approach of carrying a weapon. So a tazer, a knife. But if smelling salts won't work, you don't think you could wrestle off a large angry dog, then, if you feel that there are too many dangerous dogs in the areas you walk it might be the best option?* The only way to have a chance of keeping your pet safe? Of course, huge problems if people feel the need to go down this route. You can imagine the weapons getting used on people as the owner of the attacking dog tries to protect his pet (who in their eyes is perhaps only doing what comes naturally).


----------



## moonviolet (Aug 11, 2011)

The whole mention of knives and tasers makes me feel a little sickened.

Just want to mention 2 things about tasers/stunguns (taser is a brand name) possession alone could subject you to a maximum 10 years imprisonment and an unlimited fine. While unlikely to be given the maximum, it's often the law abiding that take the law into their own hands who get made examples of, want to risk that?

If you used it on the attacking dog while it's biting, your dog would get the jolt too. want to risk using something that can kill humans, on your dog?

If you really have so many dangerously out of control dogs in the areas you walk, can I ask how many times you have reported them to the authorities?


----------



## Galadriel17 (Jan 22, 2012)

scarter said:


> It puzzles me why anyone would have an issue with people wanting to discuss the best course of action to take in this kind of situation. But each to their own - I have no desire whatsoever to convert you to my way of thinking...


I don't have a problem with anyone wanting to sensibly discuss how to break up a dog attack.

What I do have a problem with is your sensationalism, suggestions to carry weapons, your 'breedism' and continual ignorance of the facts and your refusal to answer many questions that have been directed at you which I find quite rude.


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

Personally I'd like to see consequences for *all *those who can't or won't control their dogs regardless of whether or not the dog is aggressive. I've had many, many more encounters with non aggressive out of control dogs than I have with aggressive ones. The sheer number of people I see who don't give a monkeys what their dog is doing is unbelievable and it's this that often causes the problems in my experience.


----------



## Galadriel17 (Jan 22, 2012)

> ...I'm certain with any normal dog...


I'm quite interested in your definition of a 'normal dog' Scarter.


----------



## Shadowrat (Jan 30, 2011)

It really isn't always possible to _prevent_ an attack. 
Dres was attacked recently on the beach, in the evening.
A GSD just bolted toward him out of nowhere, and lunged at him, snarling and very clearly not being friendly. He only failed to seriously hurt Dres because my boyfriend kicked the dog in the neck before it managed to snap its jaws on him.
We could have in no way prevented or predicted this. Didn't even see the dog until it was too late.

In fact, the dogs owner didn't give a damn, he was a good way away. 
And when he saw Jon kick his dog, he suddenly came over, and yes, it came to a fist fight between my OH and this guy (GSD owner threw the first punch. He said 'why did you kick my dog?!' and Jon said 'because your dog went to attack my dog!' and then Jon got a punch in the face for this, which he returned).
Even if we had thought 'that dog looks like its about to bite Dres' what could we have done? 
Picked up a 40kilo dobe and run off with him? Walked on and assumed the GSD would just stop and head back?

When a dog appears from no-where and makes a beeline for your dog, snarling, growing, aggressive body language, what can you do if you have a big dog?
If he were a toy breed, sure, might have been an option to pick him up and out of the way. Not an option with a big dog! 
Luckily, thanks to Jon, Dres wasn't hurt. But if he'd not kicked this dog, I imagine it could have done some serious damage to my puppy, dobes don't exactly have a lot of fur or body fat to protect them from bites :

I in no way consider this was our fault. It was the fault of the owner of the GSD who was happy to let the dog run off lead and must have known it had these issues; this isn't the sort of thing a dog just randomly starts doing one day. Im pretty sure he knew his dog was dodgy with other dogs, and I'd be surprised if it hadn't done this before.

I do agree that being vigilant and watching other dogs closely can help prevent SOME attacks. But its not a guarantee, and when nasty dogs race up with only one thing on their mind, you go into auto pilot, and perhaps you don't think straight. Its like seeing your child attacked, you don't have time to sit and rationalise how best to stop it, you just run in there and act on instinct.


----------



## Guest (Jul 23, 2012)

Shadowrat said:


> It really isn't always possible to _prevent_ an attack.
> Dres was attacked recently on the beach, in the evening.
> A GSD just bolted toward him out of nowhere, and lunged at him, snarling and very clearly not being friendly. *He only failed to seriously hurt Dres because my boyfriend kicked the dog in the neck before it managed to snap its jaws on him.*
> We could have in no way prevented or predicted this. Didn't even see the dog until it was too late.


I am really sorry this happened to you and no, I dont think the attack was in any way shape or form your fault at all!

But your example is a PERFECT example of what so many of us are trying to say. 
If the GSD had intended to truly harm your dog, a kick to the neck would not have stopped him. If the GSD had really meant to snap his teeth on to your dog, I really doubt your BF could have gotten his foot out there faster than the GSD could have clamped on. Most dogs are FAR faster, more agile, and more athletic than most humans. Missed bites are by and large meant to be missed - AKA air snaps. And in GSDs air snapping is very common. Its definitely meant as a threat to another dog, and it is definitely an aggressive gesture, but its most definitely NOT a missed bite. IOW, the dog was aggressing without intending to do much harm.

Depending on how you re-tell this story, it can turn in to yet another anecdotal evidence of the oodles of uncontrolled killer dogs running around when in fact this was very likely just a dog being a jerk who likely would not have caused much (if any) damage even without intervention.

A GSD is fully capable of killing prey its own size or larger, yet your dog was entirely unhurt in this incident. And believe me, if the GSD had wanted to hurt him, he would have, regardless of your intervention.

I see this type of scenario not as proof of how vicious some dogs out there are, but of how RARE it is for a dog to get seriously injured or killed because of a freak encounter with an aggressive dog.


----------



## Firedog (Oct 19, 2011)

One of my Border Terriers was attacked last year outside my own house.A neighbours dog came flying out and grabbed my girl from behind.It had her by the throat and was spinning her around.If i had tried to pull the dog off it would have ripped mines throat out.I stood shouting for help and a couple of neighbours came out,one really didn't help by kicking the attacking dog in the ribs.Another neighbour came over and calmly put her hand over the attacking dogs nose which gave me enough time to run indoors,although i don't remember getting indoors.My girl was 30 seconds from death,if the other dog had let go and grabbed again it would have all been over.I took her to the vets and she had 3 deep holes in her neck and needed a general anesthetic and 9 stiches put in her neck.She also ended up having her neck drained and 5 lots of antibiotics.








If i hadn't been outside my own home my dog would have died.The thing is if you are by yourself even if you get the attacking dog off,how do you keep it off.If it seriously means business then i expect it would come back to finish the job.If one of mine attacked i would pick it up by the base of the tail and swing upwards but it is not possible to do this with a large dog.As somebody else said if you have two terriers going for it you really need to have some way of seperating them or they will just carry on.


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

Shadowrat said:


> It really isn't always possible to _prevent_ an attack.
> Dres was attacked recently on the beach, in the evening.
> A GSD just bolted toward him out of nowhere, and lunged at him, snarling and very clearly not being friendly. He only failed to seriously hurt Dres because my boyfriend kicked the dog in the neck before it managed to snap its jaws on him.


If this dog had been intent on attacking Dres then it would not have stopped at one attempt. And it had plenty of opportunity to carry on if its owner was a good distance away and then got involved in a fist fight with your OH. I've run into a lot of dogs who'd charge over snarling and acting all threatening but they've all been bullies who cause no real physical harm and who are actually pretty easy to send running off with their tail between their legs. Not saying it's acceptable behaviour and can't have serious effects on the dog "attacked", just that it's a far cry from an attack with intent. I hope it hasn't affected Dres or you and your OH too badly.

But no, it's not always possible to prevent an attack and I won't say that that doesn't worry me. The one that seriously attacked Rupert legged it across a large field to do so. I never even saw it coming until it was practically on us by which point it was way too late. And while the vast majority of fights and attacks (using both terms loosely) I've witnessed have been accompanied by big flashy displays and horrendous sound effects this one was pretty much silent and violent, there was no barking or growling, no posturing, just two dogs giving it everything they had. I think that scared me as much as anything else to be honest. But even if I'd seen the dog coming what could I have done? I saw it coming the second time it attacked him a few weeks later and couldn't deter it.

When we say prevention is better than taking action when a fight has broken out I don't think any of us mean that it's 100% possible to prevent a fight from ever happening, not when there are so many irresponsible owners around. But really serious attacks aren't common and most attacking dogs are, in my experience, nothing but bullies and like most bullies don't want to risk getting hurt.


----------



## scarter (Apr 26, 2009)

Sarah1983 said:


> When we say prevention is better than taking action when a fight has broken out I don't think any of us mean that it's 100% possible to prevent a fight from ever happening, not when there are so many irresponsible owners around. But really serious attacks aren't common and most attacking dogs are, in my experience, nothing but bullies and like most bullies don't want to risk getting hurt.


You say serious attacks aren't common. Well certainly you wouldn't expect a serious attack to take place every time you walked your dog. Not even once a year. Many dogs will go their entire lives without being attacked. But I would say that they are common enough to give cause for concern and make it worth while having a good think about how you'd handle an attack. I have several friends who's dogs have been viciously attacked without warning; I know of dogs that have been seriously hurt and even killed in local parks; I've read of numerous unprovoked attacks on forums such as these. Frequent enough to make it worthwhile having a think about what you might do if it happens to your dog.

You say most attacking dogs are, in your experience, nothing but bullies and like most bullies don't want to risk getting hurt. A timid or small dog is unlikely to be able to hurt his large attacker so that may well be why he was chosen as a victim. One thing that's a common theme in these attacks is that they don't turn into fights - the victim just wants to get away and is terrified. Does it not follow that if a human steps in with a good swift kick (or in some cases even a shout) that the cowardly bully would realise that his potential victim isn't quite the 'easy prey' that he thought it was?

I also wonder how you know whether a charging dog means business or is just being a jerk? Surely if a dog charges like this you have to assume that it means to harm your dog and take whatever steps necessary to prevent it. It does quite clearly fit the description of 'dangerously out of control'. (bjt - I take on board that you don't always see it coming - it happened like that with my friend's dog too)

I am quite sure that some attacks are easier to stop than others. A lot will come down to why the dog is attacking. Some dogs have been selectively bred, over generations, for their tenacity, lack of fear and resilience to pain - their willingness to attack another dog and not give up until it's dead. And I'm quite sure there are some that whilst not specifically bred for these traits they have them anyway! Others have been selectively bred for their willingness to obey humans - I'm sure they are much easier for a human to frighten off! And yes, some will just be opportunistic bullies.

But, assuming you're correct and a kick won't fend of a real attack then what would? Do people really think it's true that a dog that wants to attack will do so no matter what any human does to intervene?


----------



## Guest (Jul 23, 2012)

scarter said:


> You say serious attacks aren't common. Well certainly you wouldn't expect a serious attack to take place every time you walked your dog. Not even once a year. Many dogs will go their entire lives without being attacked. But I would say that they are common enough to give cause for concern and make it worth while having a good think about how you'd handle an attack. I have several friends who's dogs have been viciously attacked without warning; *I know of* dogs that have been seriously hurt and even killed in local parks; *I've read of *numerous unprovoked attacks on forums such as these. Frequent enough to make it worthwhile having a think about what you might do if it happens to your dog.


As I suspected. Hearsay.

As for the rest of your post, this entire thread is FULL of suggestions of what to do if you or your dog is attacked. I myself have typed them out a few times. 
Im really scratching my head as to why you keep repeating the same questions that have now been answered numerous times. 
Do you not believe the answers? Do you not trust the source, do you want people to say shoot the dog? Because thats what happens in other countries like where I am. 
I guess I just dont get where youre going with all this. This almost obsession with savage dogs. Its... well, its weird...


----------



## Malmum (Aug 1, 2010)

*Bjt* - to get a 'latching' dog of you 'wheelbarrow' it. Lift the back legs off the floor, it *will* let go as it has no purchase and when it does you have to walk it backwards in an arc (semi circle) so as it can't retain balance. You keep doing this til the other dog is out of harms way. Punching and kicking will worsen the injuries of the attacked dog. 
I carry smelling salts in case of a latch on attack. I have re3ad ammonia works in separating fighting pit bulls so I think this stuff will work with other dogs. It is extremely potent and if you sniff the bottle too close it throws your head back wards. 
Mackenzies Smelling Salts 17 ml 5012617000101 | eBay

I had a dog killed by just one bite and i'm f****ed if it's going to ever happen again! So glad your dog survived.


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

> You say most attacking dogs are, in your experience, nothing but bullies and like most bullies don't want to risk getting hurt. A timid or small dog is unlikely to be able to hurt his large attacker so that may well be why he was chosen as a victim. One thing that's a common theme in these attacks is that they don't turn into fights - the victim just wants to get away and is terrified. Does it not follow that if a human steps in with a good swift kick (or in some cases even a shout) that the cowardly bully would realise that his potential victim isn't quite the 'easy prey' that he thought it was?


That's probably pretty much how it works. Human steps in, dog realises it's not such an easy target, decides it's not worth it. Or something along those lines anyway.



> I also wonder how you know whether a charging dog means business or is just being a jerk? Surely if a dog charges like this you have to assume that it means to harm your dog and take whatever steps necessary to prevent it. It does quite clearly fit the description of 'dangerously out of control'.


If a dog is charging towards mine I step in with the voice and body language. I don't wait around to see whether it's hell bent on attacking, just a bully or an over enthusiastic friendly dog. If the voice of doom etc doesn't work then I'll escalate to whatever is needed but so far voice of doom along with body blocking has worked well for me with loose dogs I'm not sure about. Some people use treat bombs, throw a handful of food at the approaching dog and while it's eating that get out of there but it backfired for me, the dog kept on following wanting more food  And yeah, a dog charging towards someone or towards another dog does fit the description of dangerously out of control imo.



> But, assuming you're correct and a kick won't fend of a real attack then what would? Do people really think it's true that a dog that wants to attack will do so no matter what any human does to intervene?


I think once a dog is in that state of mind it's pretty much oblivious to anything else that's going on. You read stories where someones been attacked and hitting the dog with hammers, planks of wood and even shooting them non fatally hasn't stopped them. I honestly don't know of anything that could be guaranteed to fend off a dog who is hell bent on attacking. Having been on both sides of real attacks the intensity of the attack and lack of reaction to anything that was done is frightening.

I'd like to see a stop to dog on dog and dog on human attacks as much as anyone, I just don't see that it's as simple as do A, B and C and they will stop. Or do A, B and C and you'll break up a fight easily.


----------



## moonviolet (Aug 11, 2011)

Sarah1983 said:


> If a dog is charging towards mine I step in with the voice and body language. I don't wait around to see whether it's hell bent on attacking, just a bully or an over enthusiastic friendly dog. If the voice of doom etc doesn't work then I'll escalate to whatever is needed but so far voice of doom along with body blocking has worked well for me with loose dogs I'm not sure about.


I whole heartedly agree with this, I've turned away a good few charging bullies. I've needed to less and less since Tink's body language has stopped screaming I'm scared.


----------



## Shadowrat (Jan 30, 2011)

Sarah1983 said:


> If this dog had been intent on attacking Dres then it would not have stopped at one attempt.


Oh, Im sure. But its intentions certainly weren't friendly, and Im glad my OH did what he did or else my puppy could have ended up with a lot more than shaken nerves. As it is, he's seemed ok since, but he does now have a bit of an issue with GSDs 

I don't think he didn't intend to *kill* him, and I said as much to my OH when he got back from the walk, saying pretty much the same: 'if he'd wanted to hurt him, he would have done'. My OH pretty much agreed that he probably wouldn't have ripped him to bits, but he almost certainly would have nipped him, and his 'lunge' wasn't at all acceptable or harmless and needed to be stopped asap.

In my mind, no owner would take the risk and stand idly by and wait and see what happened. Especially with a 6 month old puppy.
I care as much about my dogs mental health as his physical, and given that I've worked so hard to get him comfortable around other dogs, that kind of junk is the last thing he needed.
My OH was ok, though  While he's one of the most mellow people I know, he does stand up for himself in that kind of situation. He's an ex army medic, so he doesn't like to hurt anyone, but he also won't be pushed about :tongue_smilie:
I do wonder what would have happened if it was just me, on my own, as a lone woman? Would I have had the balls to take the action my OH did? And what would have happened if the guy had gotten aggressive with me?

If my dog ran up to a puppy that was minding its own business, snarling, bearing teeth and growling, then making a lunge, I would fully expect someone to boot him in the face or neck or do whatever they could to get him to go away, and I wouldn't blame them in the slightest; I'd blame myself for letting a dog with that temperament off lead.
The way the guy attacked as if it was our fault, when our dog was perfectly well behaved and his was uncontrolled and unruly was pretty shocking!

Fortunately, thats the only 'aggressive' encounter Dres has really had so far. A couple of incidents where little yappy dogs have surrounded him and harassed him, but no dog has ever attempted to bite him like that.


----------



## moonviolet (Aug 11, 2011)

Shadowrat what your OH did was PREVENT an attack. I too would have have done all I could to prevent the attack as you say super important with a young dog to protect them from bad experiences.

Did you guys report this guy? Out of control human, with an out of control dog isn't a great combo.

I hope both Dres and your OH are ok and there's no lasting damage.

ETA: I do think it would have been nipping and probably pinning down general bully tactics


----------



## Galadriel17 (Jan 22, 2012)

scarter said:


> ...I am quite sure that some attacks are easier to stop than others. A lot will come down to why the dog is attacking. Some dogs have been selectively bred, over generations, for their tenacity, lack of fear and resilience to pain - their willingness to attack another dog and not give up until it's dead. And I'm quite sure there are some that whilst not specifically bred for these traits they have them anyway! Others have been selectively bred for their willingness to obey humans - I'm sure they are much easier for a human to frighten off! And yes, some will just be opportunistic bullies...


I still don't think you understand; it does not come down to breed.

If a dog is seriously intent on causing harm and isn't just being a bit of a bully then it will do no matter what breed it is, a human won't be able to scare it off.

You say some dogs have been bred for their tenacity, lack of fear and resilience to pain; well one breed that fits that description is the Staffordshire Bull Terrier. That same breed also fits the description 'willingness to obey humans'.

Back when dog fighting was a sport, the bull and terrier dogs, as they were called, had to respond to the human in the pit, when they were in full on fight drive. Redirected agression toward a human was not accepted and any dog that did would be culled hence why breeds descended from bull and terrier types tend to be much more reliable with humans than any other breed.

A dog descended from a bull and terrier type dog is less likely to redirect onto a human when a fight is being broken up than something like a guarding or herding breed even today, or so I understand.

Still interested to hear your definition of a 'normal' dog


----------



## Shadowrat (Jan 30, 2011)

moonviolet said:


> Did you guys report this guy? Out of control human, with an out of control dog isn't a great combo.
> 
> I hope both Dres and your OH are ok and there's no lasting damage.
> 
> ETA: I do think it would have been nipping and probably pinning down general bully tactics


No, he didn't, it all happened a bit quick really, and it was 9pm at night on a pretty empty beach. I think by the time Jon had managed to report the guy, he'd probably have scarpered. 
Its not a nice area, unfortunately, and is the second time Jon has had someone throw a punch at him for trivial reasons. He's a big guy, and I think sometimes people think of that as a challenge and a way to impress their friends (last time, it was a group of 20 somethings who just started shouting abuse at him when he was out running, then pursued him).

Yeah, it could have just been a dog being a complete bully, but we'd never seen any kind of behaviour like that before, and we take Dres to the park daily with loads of other dogs. We've seen some boisterous ones, and some who run up yapping and try to chase him and seem to act a bit like bullies, but never this kind of 'immediate bee line, snarling, snapping, growling' behaviour before.
In all other situations, I always feel that if we just walk on away from the other dog quickly, they'll give up, and the owners are always nearby at the park to call them back.
But there was no way we'd have been able to walk away from this dog, he was so fast and so focused on Dresden, and the owner was too far away to be able to do anything to control his dog.

Wasn't as bad as it could have been, and I do wonder what would have happened if Jon didn't intervene in that way, but it makes me a little wary of going to the beach myself with Dresden now. The park is ok, because its generally full of doggy people who all kinda understand dog etiquette and know how to behave and control their dogs, I've never met any real trouble makers there; too many dog owners, and too much chance of the owner getting in trouble. But the beach is a little bit more open to everyone, not just 'serious' doggy people but just anyone with a dog (and we all know there is a difference between a dedicated, serious dog owner and someone who just 'has dogs'). 
I did wonder if this guy was walking on the beach that late at night because he knew he had dodgy dogs and thought this was the most likely time to let them off when there wouldn't be anyone else around. 
Jon was only there that late because he'd just dropped me off at work, right near the beach, and wanted to give Dres a quick run before going home.


----------



## Snoringbear (Sep 26, 2008)

Angels_Sin said:


> But Bear, the difference is that's your dog trying to keep others away, which I understand. This was a dog that was perfectly happy until she spotted my dog, which wasn't even looking at her or aware of her, and she went after her, crossing half a playing field to get to her. I don't see how that can be a defensive action.
> 
> The reason I doubt the explanation that this Staff was attacked in the past is because the lad told me she has a problem with dogs that look like my dog because this was the type that attacked her. I know for a fact however that she's taken a chuck out of the side of a Lurcher and almost killed a Yorkshire Terrier. I honestly think he was making excuses for the dogs behaviour because he was embarrised and at the time I was so shaken (it didn't occur to me until this point that the dog easily could have turned its aggression on me) that I didn't really question it. Plus, with this lad, he does at least sort of try. His Dad on the other hand is a different story. It's not the first time we've had trouble with this dog and once when ours was playing with a couple of others it came over, went for one of the dogs, my partner ended up having to pick it up by one leg (awful I know but it was a moment of panic) as someone else had been bitten by it. Even though they were all shouting at this guy to come and get his dog, he walked past like he really couldn't care less, didn't even say sorry, in fact, didn't say a word.
> 
> I do understand the fear reaction, thanks to this dog and its idiot owners, my dog is now nervous around new dogs and I worry that if I can't find a way to put a stop to it now, it could turn to aggression. But that aggression should only be displayed if she feels threatened and this staffy was not in the slightest bit threatened. My point is, its not really relevant what the dog might have gone through in the past, at that moment, an attack like the one Ive outlined IS unprovoked.


I don't see a great deal of difference, to be honest. With my dog it's all down to the threshold in which she feels threatened. She won't do anything to a dog 50m away minding it's own business, but a dog 10m away will be a different matter. If a dog is barking at her or staring her down, then this escalates her response regarding distance. The dog you describe seems to have a lower threshold for it's behaviour and a far more excessive response. Her change in demeanour is much the same as the other dog. Happy one minute and then when she feels threatened she goes on the offensive. L/C described this best as being pre-emptive.


----------



## Guest (Jul 24, 2012)

Snoringbear said:


> I don't see a great deal of difference, to be honest. With my dog it's all down to the threshold in which she feels threatened. She won't do anything to a dog 50m away minding it's own business, but a dog 10m away will be a different matter. If a dog is barking at her or staring her down, then this escalates her response regarding distance. The dog you describe seems to have a lower threshold for it's behaviour and a far more excessive response. Her change in demeanour is much the same as the other dog. Happy one minute and then when she feels threatened she goes on the offensive. L/C described this best as being pre-emptive.


And this is exactly where education comes in. Threshold varies from dog to dog, triggers vary from dog to dog. One of my dogs is fine with dogs inches from him if theyre just walking by. But a dog meters away staring at him is likely to get him riled up. He can handle dogs playing tug, bouncing balls, running dogs, but two dogs playing is *very* hard for him to ignore. If the play starts to get too rough, he is the one who will jump in with teeth. Very normal, very typical, does not make him dangerous even though he will attack.

Another thing owners forget is that ALL dogs are subject to predatory drift, and you dont know what their trigger is until it happens. Two of our dogs have lived together, sleep together, eat together, never had a single issue over anything. I accidentally step on one dogs tail, dog yelps, other dog attacks him. Predatory drift. Thank goodness for voice control. They have been fine since, never any issues. But now I know that high pitched noises are a trigger for my guy.
Sometimes its not a noise but a certain movement that triggers the brain to switch. Very normal, does not make the dog any more dangerous than any other dog out there.

The more we know about our own dogs and normal dog behavior in general, the more we can anticipate, manage, train and PREVENT problems.


----------



## charlearose (Sep 18, 2011)

it was the only thing dh could do both dogs are fine now and we still separate them 95 percent of the time 
its all about what you can do at the time if dh was near the hose he would have used it but the need to separate both dogs he had to be quick and a quick shock was the only thing that he could do /worked

we didn't rehome them for us its not a issue we bought em so we will battle it out to the bitter end they have to live with each other to a certain extent and get on

when we are not around we have them In separate areas of the garden they are fine with all other dogs just not each other and its always the older dog Shabba that start its but he is just thick cos Hooker has 3 inches and 2 stone on him so kicks his hairy ass each time but dogs just react size isn't what they are thinking of



Ang2 said:


> Ive read so many times how brute force seems to be the only answer. Its just not something I would be capable of doing. Thats why I was hoping to find a safer way, by using a spray or something that doesnt have a lasting effect


----------



## charlearose (Sep 18, 2011)

I'm always amazed at how many people ( unasked ) come up to and try to pet , kiss , hug, our ddbs ( if i had a pound for everyone that did that i wouldn't be doing the lottery ticket tonight  i think they are mad and irresponsible ( imo) 

we have stopped people doing it because should a another dog go past while someone is petting the our dog or in front of it if one of our dogs try to jump forward to the dog they could easily nip whatever is in front of them or push them over 

im confident that they wouldn't carry it on and attack a person or small child in this situation but a nip from a 12 stone ddb is pretty nasty and will break skin and leave a few bruises at the very least 
So we no longer let people and especially small kids pet our older dogs if we have the younger 4 who we have had from pups then its not a problem as they don't have any issues with other dogs at all but our older dogs we didn't get from puppies so i don't think they were socialised as well as our pups who we took everywhere with us from 8 weeks old socialising them so much that they think they own the local pub


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

charlearose said:


> ...*a nip from a 12 stone DDB is pretty nasty & will break skin and leave a few bruises
> at the very least *


Sorry - that's not a NIP, & it shows poor bite-inhibition; a 'nip' is a warning with minimal skin-contact & minimal 
pressure, it does not "break the skin" - there is no puncture, at most a shallow pink scratch from a tooth, 
there should be no bruise visible on an adult, & a barely-visible bruise on a child under 5-YO - 
a faint blue mark, no more than that. THAT's a 'nip'.

the size of the dog has zero impact on the effect of an inhibited bite: a nip is a nip, whether the dog is 
2# or 250#; a shallow puncture is the same depth, no matter what size dog inflicts it.


----------



## Guest (Jul 26, 2012)

leashedForLife said:


> Sorry - that's not a NIP, & it shows poor bite-inhibition; a 'nip' is a warning with minimal skin-contact & minimal
> pressure, it does not "break the skin" - there is no puncture, at most a shallow pink scratch from a tooth,
> there should be no bruise visible on an adult, & a barely-visible bruise on a child under 5-YO -
> a faint blue mark, no more than that. THAT's a 'nip'.
> ...


Agreed, the bolded needs to be emphasized. Again, education - bite inhibition. Dogs have amazing control over their bite pressure.
Just because the dog is bigger does not mean the bite is automatically going to be more damaging. Big dogs are just as capable of bite inhibition as smaller one.

Conversely a 10 pound dog with no bite inhibition can, and will do far more damage than a 110 pound dog with excellent bite inhibition.


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

ouesi said:


> Conversely a 10# dog with no bite inhibition can & will do far-more damage than a 110# dog
> with excellent bite inhibition.


that's important, too - THAT's why we don't want human flesh inserted between dogs who are fighting: 
UNinhibited bites are horrific damage in a matter of a few seconds, while inhibited bites are minimal.

Dogs who bite a person when they redirect from a fight with another dog are not likely to inhibit 
their bite: SOME do, many do not - & if they think they're biting the other dog, they are NOT inhibiting 
the bite at all, in a *serious* fight [vs a snark, scuffle or minor noisy assault].


----------



## Attack Mode (Aug 13, 2012)

Finally found the thread that made me aware of this forums existence. Been searching for it this afternoon. 

Some good points about how to prevent and break up fights. 

The wheelbarrow method is by far the safest and easiest method for breaking up a fight. That is not to say other methods will not work, such as choking via the collar. However you place yourself in extreme danger by trying this method. 

You are no good to your dogs life if you yourself are then injured.

With regards using break sticks, smelling salts, fire extinguishers etc. Not only are these limited in their use, some could land you with a criminal conviction.

Break sticks should only be used by trained personnel, i.e correctly. Incorrect use can lead to serious injury. Not only that but they are only suitable for certain breeds. Of a more serious note is the fact they are classed as Dog Fighting Paraphernalia, so will land you will a criminal record.

Smelling Salts again will not work on most breeds, indeed some breeds can be affected more than others by the ammonia content. Any consequences as a result of its use, may land you with having to reimburse vet fees for the dog concerned if affected by the salts. 

Trust me the fees will be far higher than the cost of treating an injured dog or indeed the maximum fine a dog on dog attack can result in. So in effect you will save money by letting the fight continue. (Not that I am saying you should of course.)

Indeed, the dangers presented by dogs being exposed to smelling salts is one reason why APDT does not permit its trainers using them.

Pepper Spray is illegal in the UK anyway. But along with CS Spray, is not effective on dogs the way it is on humans. Both are designed to trigger the tear ducts of humans, an area that differs greatly in the eyes of dogs.

So spraying a dog with either spray will not make it "cry". So will have no effect on ending a dog fight.

Even the UK legal alternatives such as Bite Back have been known not to have the desired effect. Indeed they often have the opposite effect and make the attack worse.

Apologies for awakening an old thread.


----------



## Snoringbear (Sep 26, 2008)

I've been in a room filled with CS gas, it doesn't only affect your tear ducts, it reacts with all the moisture in your body. Your nose, throat and even your skin if it has sweat on it all start to become irritated and burn. Starting to cry is a reaction to expel it from your eyes, something a dog can't do and the addition of moisture makes it worse. I'm not sure why dogs aren't affected, but they don't sweat and have a high pain tolerance and don't cry to make it worse. Pepper spray with capsaicin in would be a different matter. I've seen my dogs eat food I've dropped with 35,000 scoville heat unit sauce on and there's a definite reaction of it being unpleasant. I've tasted 1 million SHU hot sauce and the pain is incredible and it makes you cry. Military grade pepper spray goes up to 5 million SHU, I can't see anything not finding that extremely painful, dogs included.


----------

