Dangerous Dogs YES or NO??

RE: Dangerous Dogs YES or NO??

Ben Ogden — Fri, 13 May 2016 17:40:00 GMT

[quote user="Arlo Guthrie"]

[quote user="Sal the 1st"]

[quote user="Arlo Guthrie"]

[quote user="Sal the 1st"]its a great idea but who decides exactly what is the best /most reliable advice to be giving.[/quote]

Surely the 'attacks on humans' data answers the question, though one would want to know much more about the severity of the reported attacks. Such as did they require hospital treatment.

[/quote]

?[/quote]

What I meant is that if there are good solid statistics about the number of attacks on people according to breed type, that surely is the basis for good advice?

(but you'd need to have detail about the nature of the injuries, or you might end up giving too much weight to the dog that just gave someone a nip when they tried to remove its food)

No?

[/quote]

The 'data' on this will always be inaccurate. Most people wouldn't report aggression or injury caused by small/toy breeds because they are not imposing in stature or cannot cause major injury.

It is a tall order to change public opinion on things like this, when the media only has these kind (larger breed dogs) of dog injuries to report.

If there were large breed Chihuahuas, Jack Russels or Yorkshire Terriers we'd all be in trouble!

Until the Government can get access to strong data about canine aggression, it won't make any difference and the short term answer will always be chosen i.e - Ban the big doggies and stick fingers in ears and thumbs up..... well you get the idea.

RE: Dangerous Dogs YES or NO??

Lydia123 — Thu, 12 May 2016 18:07:26 GMT

I think education about dogs in general is important, rather than selecting particular breeds.

RE: Dangerous Dogs YES or NO??

Sal the 1st — Wed, 11 May 2016 22:26:31 GMT

ok thanks for clarifying.

but whose advice do you take when there are so many people helpfully offering it and there is so much of it around - both good and bad? and as a pet owner or parent how would you differentiate between the two?

as an aside I am really surprised that Airedales haven't made any of the lists - I have perhaps met a handful of nice ones in @ 30yrs

RE: Dangerous Dogs YES or NO??

Arlo Guthrie — Wed, 11 May 2016 20:37:51 GMT

[quote user="Sal the 1st"]

[quote user="Arlo Guthrie"]

[quote user="Sal the 1st"]its a great idea but who decides exactly what is the best /most reliable advice to be giving.[/quote]

Surely the 'attacks on humans' data answers the question, though one would want to know much more about the severity of the reported attacks. Such as did they require hospital treatment.

[/quote]

?[/quote]

What I meant is that if there are good solid statistics about the number of attacks on people according to breed type, that surely is the basis for good advice?

(but you'd need to have detail about the nature of the injuries, or you might end up giving too much weight to the dog that just gave someone a nip when they tried to remove its food)

No?

RE: Dangerous Dogs YES or NO??

Su Hoddinott — Wed, 11 May 2016 20:36:53 GMT

I totally agree 'Sal the 1st (sal the 1st) that in a ideal world we should have a dog licence and you have to prove yourself as a knowledgeable owner. Unfortunately the problem is, who would be responsible for enforcing licence?

As part of my degree 5 years ago I asked the question for my dissertation "what is the the public's opinion on a UK dog licence?" An interesting fact that came from the 206 questionnaires that were completed was, a dog licence could force dogs of certain breeds to go underground and therefore causing more problems as these dogs would not receive veterinary treatment, behavior training or be socialized.

RE: Dangerous Dogs YES or NO??

Sal the 1st — Wed, 11 May 2016 19:48:33 GMT

[quote user="Arlo Guthrie"]

[quote user="Sal the 1st"]its a great idea but who decides exactly what is the best /most reliable advice to be giving.[/quote]

Surely the 'attacks on humans' data answers the question, though one would want to know much more about the severity of the reported attacks. Such as did they require hospital treatment.

[/quote]

RE: Dangerous Dogs YES or NO??

Arlo Guthrie — Wed, 11 May 2016 15:41:08 GMT

[quote user="Jacqui Duffield"]Interestingly some other figures for you, this come from an article created in January 2016 in attempt to review all listed dog attacks and create a list as it were of dogs breeds and there attacks (probable not possible but here we go - I've only listed relevant breeds In this discussion the list was long!):[/quote]

Very interesting, is there a reference for that list? Who made it, and what data they used?

[quote user="Su Hoddinott"]does aggression and dangerous equal the same. For example aggression could be describing a behavior with food or toys yet dangerous could equal the power to kill or seriously injure someone. [/quote]

I guess that's a rhetorical question, but no, and not just because aggression may or may not be directed at people, but because an aggressive Dobermann obviously presents a far greater threat than an aggressive Chihuahua (I know I'm stating the obvious, just explaining thinking). The threat is a combination of the size and behaviour characteristics of the breed.

[quote user="Sal the 1st"]its a great idea but who decides exactly what is the best /most reliable advice to be giving.[/quote]

Surely the 'attacks on humans' data answers the question, though one would want to know much more about the severity of the reported attacks. Such as did they require hospital treatment.

[quote user="shakira free miles"]There is NO data to confirm that certain breeds are more dangerous than others.[/quote]

shakira free miles Surely that's not right. Earlier in the thread Jacqui Duffield gave data on dog attacks by breed. Don't yet know the source, but if it is solid data then it surely confirms that some breeds are more dangerous than others?

RE: Dangerous Dogs YES or NO??

shakira free miles — Wed, 11 May 2016 09:31:02 GMT

Great response to this. I am the founder of The SaveABulls which is a veterinary led campaign against breed bans-Pit Bulls are often a target, which then drags in all bull breeds. The misconception of breeds 'dangerousness' has a bigger impact than we imagine. Hundreds of puppies are put to sleep in rehoming centres as they are often poorly identified as banned breeds. There is NO data to confirm that certain breeds are more dangerous than others. As a profession we must stand together on scientific data for animal related legislation.

I have witnessed the killing of healthy dogs based on their appearance as by law they are 'dangerous dogs' - at 3 months of age - and not rehomable by law. This is not preventing dog bites. Education is what will have the greatest impact on this worrying issue. The question is " What defines a dangerous dog?" A dog that has knocked someone over? A dog that barks? Or a small breed that nips your ankles when you arrive home?

The welfare issues that breed bans causes are unimagineable, I could write a very long list!

Please get in touch if you would like to know more about the campaign.

Kind regards,

Shakira Free Miles RVN

RE: Dangerous Dogs YES or NO??

Alice Riley — Wed, 11 May 2016 01:26:23 GMT

In all honesty I think this sign is disgusting! how they can be so stupid to label 'OBVIOUS' dog breeds to be dangerous.. It's not the dogs fault in how they turn out it's what the owner has taught them and how they have been trained.
At the same time typically walking down the road I get why people specifically react the way they do to a staffordshire, german shepherd, pitbull etc. It's an obvious dog which generally has a bad reputation as all you hear are these breeds that have gone for a child.. never a JRT or a westie and from personally experience these are most commonly found to cause most problems..
Everyone is entitled to their opinions and I think this guy made a DICK move by doing this! Just foolish!

RE: Dangerous Dogs YES or NO??

Sal the 1st — Tue, 10 May 2016 23:30:42 GMT

[quote user="Sophie Bowden"]

should there be more accessible reliable advice for potential owners on dog breeds, such as a universal website instead of people relying on "expert breeders" advice?

[/quote]

its a great idea but who decides exactly what is the best /most reliable advice to be giving. Is it going to be down to a person or group of people with the loudest voice or the most impressive qualifications on paper?

My 'area' is human behaviour but I have been following the animal behaviour side with interest for a number of years and maybe I have it wrong but what I am seeing is various groups or camps setting themselves up as the big I am giving differing opinions, dishing out varying advice each of them arguing that their way is the 'right' way to do things or the 'right' way to interpret /modify a behaviour - and its as confusing as hell. Its my job to work with animals every day and I am confused by some of what I read so what chance does an owner stand? How does an owner (or should I more correctly be saying 'keeper' these days) determine if the advice they are following is good or bad when big names in the industry can't even agree?

Yes there needs to be better awareness before somebody takes on a dog , or any pet for that matter, so perhaps it is time to bring back the dog licence (which I believe will happen anyway now that microchipping is compulsory, its far too great an opportunity for generating money to be missed ) but this time to get a licence to keep a dog the person applying for a licence will need to demonstrate knowledge and suitability.

RE: Dangerous Dogs YES or NO??

Sophie Bowden — Tue, 10 May 2016 22:19:03 GMT

I think the problem with dangerous dog's in the media is that it is the big dog's that have severely attacked / taken the lives of children. Had these same attacks occurred on adult's instead they probably wouldn't have been reported in the media at all. Interestingly as well no one in the media ever ask's the parents of the children if they had a chance, how would they teach their child differently about dogs? It is only recently within the past few years that people's perceptions have changed that a dog isn't just a working dog or a protector of the family any more, they have become one of the family, a furry child. People need to have better awareness before buying dog's that these animal's need trained just like kid's need guidance and telling off. I think the question is, is it the veterinary industries responsibility to properly instill behavior training and dog knowledge, or should there be more accessible reliable advice for potential owners on dog breeds, such as a universal website instead of people relying on "expert breeders" advice?

RE: Dangerous Dogs YES or NO??

Su Hoddinott — Tue, 10 May 2016 20:36:03 GMT

Thank you Jacqui Duffield for your stats this is really interesting reading.

I personally feel the key facts are that even thou Jack Russell are the most aggressive dog in the UK at the moment, does aggression and dangerous equal the same. For example aggression could be describing a behavior with food or toys yet dangerous could equal the power to kill or seriously injure someone.

I have my own list of dogs that concern me in practice here are my top 5 as you can see none of them are listed on the above sign.

1- West Highland White Terriers

2 - Weimaraners

3 - Collies

4 -Jack Russells

5 - Chihuahua

RE: Dangerous Dogs YES or NO??

Jacqui Duffield — Tue, 10 May 2016 20:00:34 GMT

I think it it all comes down to "perception". Interestingly I just goggled some figures - seemed reliable sources, I have also been studying dog aggression myself anyway.

The no1 most aggressive dog in the UK is actually at the moment the Jack russe (thanks to Liverpool).

Dachshunds, Poodles, Great Danes and Boxers are also listed in the top 10 and they are not on this sign.

Interestingly some other figures for you, this come from an article created in January 2016 in attempt to review all listed dog attacks and create a list as it were of dogs breeds and there attacks (probable not possible but here we go - I've only listed relevant breeds In this discussion the list was long!):

Labrador - 56 attacks on humans

Chow chow - 61

Akitas - 70

Golden retrievers - 11

Dobermans - 23 interestingly less then Labradors!

Greatdanes - 37

Dachshunds - 6

Boxers - 64

Huskys - 83

St Bernards are 12

GSD - 113

staffys - 35

Pitbulls (banned) were 3397 :(.

My point is.... yes Dobermans are in there, as are GSD, however so also are Labradors! I see your point about KCCS - people would ignore me if I told them to be careful of a king Charles spaniel, however what that shows is the naivety of people, and the lack of understanding and respect for dogs. IT CAN BITE, so if were gonna make our public areas safer, we shouldn't penalise certain breeds, all dogs are a threat. I love my Dobermann, I also have a patterale shes fab, I have had a GSD, and Labradors, all have been lovely. Its the owner as well.

RE: Dangerous Dogs YES or NO??

Arlo Guthrie — Tue, 10 May 2016 19:24:02 GMT

[quote user="Jacqui Duffield"]I feel some of your points are valid, however I think as a parent of a child, any child that actually any parent who says they would worry with these specific breeds of dogs, dont seem to connect to the fact that jack russels are involved human attacks and many dog attacks.[/quote]

Jacqui Duffield Good point. I certainly wouldn't feel half as nervous if my child ran off to stroke a Jack Russell than a dobermann, and maybe that's foolish.

Then again, maybe it's not. What would be interesting is to have a breakdown of the number of attacks on people by breed.

[quote user="Jacqui Duffield"]The issue with the sign is the breed discrimination, the subject should be dog awareness as a whole[/quote]

I do see where you're coming from. But then again, if you don't highlight those animals with a known risk and try and tell people they need to be as careful around a cavalier King Charles as a Pit Bull, they'll just ignore you.

Difficult, because there are lots of people with adorable examples of the breeds on the sign who obviously don't like seeing their dog demonised like that. Then again, I'll bet there are a quite a few that equally enjoy a swagger past the sign with their 'trained to kill' Rottie.

RE: Dangerous Dogs YES or NO??

Jacqui Duffield — Tue, 10 May 2016 18:44:59 GMT

I feel some of your points are valid, however I think as a parent of a child, any child that actually any parent who says they would worry with these specific breeds of dogs, dont seem to connect to the fact that jack russels are involved human attacks and many dog attacks. I think for u statement to be move valid, it should state the sign should be an awareness for all dogs, and that parents should be concerned about any dog approaching their child. I have a dobermann she is 8, i would trust near any child,but i would never leave her attended because thats just silly. There are many dogs not on this list that I think,pose more of a threat. The issue with the sign is the breed discrimination, the subject should be dog awareness as a whole to make our public areas safer.

RE: Dangerous Dogs YES or NO??

PSA-David — Tue, 10 May 2016 10:03:34 GMT

LOL,, I had a little dig at him, with my reply. especially with reference if your dog poo's put it up and put it in the bin... was that another one of his.

RE: Dangerous Dogs YES or NO??

Arlo Guthrie — Tue, 10 May 2016 09:00:17 GMT

[quote user="Su Hoddinott"]Interested to know your views on this sign? Should signs like this be put up in public places in your local area?[/quote]

Well, just to play devil's advocate:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/nearly-2000-children-savaged-dogs-7635027

As a parent myself, I can't even begin to imagine how awful it is when a child gets attacked.

And to be honest, I would be very nervous if my child was on the beach and was approached by one of these breeds unmuzzled.

Of course I know that most, say, Rhodesian Ridgebacks, will be perfectly alright. But how do I know which one is going to chew my child's face off? Even apparently docile animals have been known to turn.

When I first read your post, my gut reaction was the same as yours Su Hoddinott. It demonises these breeds. That's unfair. Most of the animals that belong to the breed groups listed will be absolutely fine.

But thinking about it some more, I'm not so sure. Beaches are places where children go to play. As a parent, I'd be worried if I saw these sorts of breeds unmuzzled near my children. I think the onus is on owners of potentially dangerous animals to keep them from attacking or frightening others.

Is a sign the best way to do that? Not sure, but it's got people talking.

RE: Dangerous Dogs YES or NO??

Bouteloua — Mon, 09 May 2016 22:32:20 GMT

I feel that this is sad. I'm glad that I give in the United States where there are not any national breed bans. Sadly there are breed bans in some counties and cities. I feel that Dangerous dogs are not breed specific. They are individual specific. All dogs can bite. The nature and the reason for the bite should be taken into consideration before that individual dog is labelled as dangerous. I've been bit by several chihuahuas, American eskimos and miniature schnauzers but they are not listed on breed bans.

RE: Dangerous Dogs YES or NO??

Su Hoddinott — Mon, 09 May 2016 20:16:20 GMT

Signs put up in Irland but was all over FB

Got me thinking about how long would it be before someone has the idea to put it up in our local parks. My GSD was brought in to a house of 4 young children and she's Been the best family pet we could have wished for. ❤️ as I posted earlier never the dog but the owner that causes problem Dogs!!!

RE: Dangerous Dogs YES or NO??

samantha robinson — Mon, 09 May 2016 19:58:51 GMT

I think these are in ireland. It's nothing but scaremongering by a group of non dog owners.

The politician that campaigned to have these erected thinks that every dog on this sign is not suitable as a family pet!!

My children would argue greatl, they love their SBT.

RE: Dangerous Dogs YES or NO??

Honeybadger — Mon, 09 May 2016 19:51:46 GMT

I can't believe this is real!! I wonder who came up with that list?! It is so short sighted.

RE: Dangerous Dogs YES or NO??

Jessica Goodwin — Mon, 09 May 2016 19:44:37 GMT

Where is this sign. I think it's awful.