Souff

"ADOPT ME" has become part of the vernacular of unscrupulous puppy sellers. "SAVE ME" would be a better term.

Maybe so, but try telling that to the owners of dogs who swear it works. I think we sometimes forget that something will work for SOME dogs, but not work so well for others. My dogs may not react to spot-ons, yet another dog who is on a different diet, or has different genetics, might well react adversely to the same product. Same thing for natural therapies. Dogs are individuals, just as humans are individuals. And their metabolisms also change, so what suits a young dog may not work so well for an older dog, etc. And getting back to the subject of garlic, did you know that some of the organic poultry people swear that fresh garlic is a great all-wormer? So, if ever you think that your free range, beautifully fresh organic eggs have just a hint of garlic flavour about them ......... Souff

Spare a thought for the child. IMO everyone involved here has failed the child. Parents, and other family members who had seen the situation. And yes, the vet. If the vet was told the dog was dangerous then the dog should have been euthanased. The cost of euthanasia is far less than having a child's needless death, or in this case horrific injuries that will scar a little girl mentally and physically, on your conscience. If anyone were to set up a public fund to cover the cost of euthanasia of dogs that were aggressive, then I for one would happily give a donation. Ultimately the dog is going to end up being put down - and too often this is AFTER the worst has happened. As a dog lover I find this inexcusable. Far better for the dog to have been euthanased in the first instance - BEFORE tragedy happens. A dog is literally on death row from the time euthanasia is first discussed. It is going to happen - 99 times out of 100. The cost of euthanasia should never stand in the way of commonsense. Souff

I agree with Mita and Greytmate, This kid definitely needs a visit from the local sergeant. Mum also needs to be told to put the knives out of the little brat's reach. Knives are weapons in the same way that guns are weapons. Guns have to be kept away from kids, and the same should apply here with the knives. The child also needs to spend some time with people who work with animals - he clearly has no respect for animals and he will later have no respect for people. Souff

Scrappynsuzie I can only report what has worked for 1 dog owner. The dog was very much alive and kicking last time I saw it. It was a largish Doberman type dog. Definitely not poisoned. Wouldn't be the pharmaceutical companies who say that garlic is poisonous to dogs, would it ? J Conlon Sorry I don't know what the dose was. A natural therapies practitioner who works with canines would be a good person to talk to, or a natural therapies site might have the info. Souff

I have a client who gives her largish dogs a garlic tablet in their food every day. She lives in a tick area and says she has never found a tick on the dogs and has no flea problems either. I have not tried it personally and I don't have breeds that are sensitive to the spot-ons so I have used spot-ons with no dramas for the last 15 years. I stopped using Frontline when they introduced Frontline Plus some years ago as the local fleas all came in to party after I used it!!! Hope it has more effectiveness now but while I am happy with either of the other 2 brands I am not going to take the risk. And yes, warning should be on all of these products. Souff

There is no place for aggressive behaviour and the "old school" methods to deal with aggression IMO work best. There is NO PLACE for aggressive behaviour when dogs are living with humans. Positive reinforcement works well but there are also times when a dog needs to be told that something or other is NOT ON. Often, the change in your tone of voice can be enough for them to get the message! Yet I see dogs that never receive that changed tone of voice - problems are avoided or excused. End result? Dogs that are basically untrustworthy. In Australia, even if I have a gun licence, I CANNOT KEEP A LOADED GUN IN MY HOUSE. Having a dog that cannot be trusted and is capable of dismembering a human, is worse than having a loaded gun in the house. At least one person will know when the gun is going to go off - the shooter. IT OFTEN CANNOT BE PREDICTED WHEN AN UNSTABLE, AGGRESSIVE DOG WILL GO OFF and the results can be as lethal as a gunshot. Souff

There is a reason. Governments banned "Pitbulls" but they didnt ban "Staffy crosses", nor any other crosses as far as I know. Naming a breed is not the answer, politicians. Not the answer at all. Souff

Agreed. They do need to be reached and the laws that are already in existence need to be enforced. If we could educate some of these people to become registered breeders and breed purebred dogs of good temperament, and get the breeding of crossbred dogs banned, we would be going a long way to overcome the current problem which is bringing dog breeding as a whole into disrepute. Souff

And it is that attitude, whether you mean it humorously or semi-seriously or not, that will sink everyone. I have Pugs so I don't care if they ban all those "big powerful nasty dogs that are born vicious" Oh no, now the law makers have decided my "hideously deformed Pugs" need to be banned too. What's that old saying about hanging together or we'll surely hang separately? If Souff is going to be hanged then I would be prefer not to be hung with a bunch who chose to breed dangerous dogs. String me up with the deranged if you will, but I cannot defend the breeding of dangerous dogs. Souff So, are you saying pitbulls are dangerous? Staffies are dangerous? The Portland dog 'Rocky' is increasingly being referred to as a "Staffordshire bull terrier cross". If you support PBs as danergous you support Staffies as dangerous - in the eyes of the public they are the same; they cannot differentiate. Lilli I give you much the same answer. Many dogs have the potential to be dangerous and when large and powerful breeds are deliberately crossed with the intention of breeding dogs that can take a person's arms off, or are trained to be aggressive towards humans and other animals, then I don't want to be aligned with the people responsible. It is a perverse form of cruelty to animals and the people who are responsible are as guilty as the dog itself when an attack like this happens. I am not going go brand any particular breed as dangerous. But the deliberate crossbreeding of dogs carries with it an explosive recipe for disaster. Good breeders of purebred dogs have been breeding for good temperament for years. They know the bloodlines and they select for the best features. Somebody in some backyard puts together a dog and a bitch on the basis that they will make "rooly good fightin dogs" to protect their stash, or whatever. Or they allow two dogs (probably already crossbred dogs) to mate just to produce a litter of puppies to sell, with no real knowledge of what is in the background of the parent dogs and no idea of what an explosive temperament they might be creating when the offspring reach maturity, particularly if they end up in the wrong household. Sorry, not on! The risk is too high. Purebred dog breeders of dogs with good temperament do not deserve to be aligned with the above. Souff

And it is that attitude, whether you mean it humorously or semi-seriously or not, that will sink everyone. I have Pugs so I don't care if they ban all those "big powerful nasty dogs that are born vicious" Oh no, now the law makers have decided my "hideously deformed Pugs" need to be banned too. What's that old saying about hanging together or we'll surely hang separately? If Souff is going to be hanged then I would be prefer not to be hung with a bunch who chose to breed dangerous dogs. String me up with the deranged if you will, but I cannot defend the breeding of dangerous dogs. Souff So, are you saying pitbulls are dangerous? Staffies are dangerous? Many dogs have the potential to be dangerous and when large and powerful breeds are deliberately crossed with the intention of breeding dogs that can take a person's arms off, or are trained to be aggressive towards humans and other animals, then I don't want to be aligned with the people responsible. It is a perverse form of cruelty to animals and the people who are responsible are as guilty as the dog itself when an attack like this happens. Souff

The stats on what breeds are involved are so notoriously unreliable that most researchers discount them. Despite what you think, most people don't know what breeds look like and anything over 10kg that's brindle or red and that's not fluffly is a "pitbull". Poodlefan Glad to hear that those stats are not taken seriously for research. The general public can be horribly inaccurate when it comes to identifying a breed of dog, and some of us who THINK we know the breeds can also be wrong at times! Puggerup Many of the most aggressive crossbred dogs I have met had little of no PB genes. Other large breeds were used in their mix. One, I am sad to say, was a purebred dog from a large breed which in the past was not known for aggression. Selection for certain traits have brought out the worst in this dog and the stupid owner was proud to tell me that he never had to lock his house! The dog was aggressive towards me, an invited visitor, in the presence of his owner. This is totally unacceptable but as house breakins, illegal stashes and home invasions are on the increase, I am seeing more of these owners and their aggressive dogs. These dogs were bred to be aggressive and the owners have encouraged that aggression. Totally unacceptable! Souff

I choose to disagree with you there Greytmate. The aim of the socialisation and training for different breeds may not be identical but the same effort is required. People who think Whippets are timid dogs (and that's a lot of folk) need to meet Howard my boy. He's outgoing, confident and friendly with strange people and dogs. The fact that I socialised the pants of him as a bub and keep that up is not a coincidence in my eyes. He was a confident pup but I chose to build on that, not take it for granted. If you want any chance of recalling a sighthound that has to be constantly practiced also. I've seen way too many dogs who people have failed to do work on because they believed that breed characteristics would prevail. The "naturally obedient" dog is the greatest myth of all. Have to agree. The amount and type of socialisation does vary a lot, even between dogs from the same bloodlines. They are not all wired the same. Your example of trying to recall a sighthound is a good one. Sometimes we are working against the dog's strongest instincts - trying to do things that do not come naturally for the dog. Early socialisation and training is vital, but the amount and type of training can vary between dogs. Souff

And it is that attitude, whether you mean it humorously or semi-seriously or not, that will sink everyone. I have Pugs so I don't care if they ban all those "big powerful nasty dogs that are born vicious" Oh no, now the law makers have decided my "hideously deformed Pugs" need to be banned too. What's that old saying about hanging together or we'll surely hang separately? If Souff is going to be hanged then I would be prefer not to be hung with a bunch who chose to breed dangerous dogs. String me up with the deranged if you will, but I cannot defend the breeding of dangerous dogs. Souff

Absolutely true. But humans should only be breeding dogs that can be safely kept in society, not deliberately look for aggressive traits and then breed them in. Ultimately this is to the advantage of nobody, including the dog. But sadly there are people who are breeding aggressive dogs, for their own $ advantage. Souff

Equipping yourself with knowledge of the research certainly helps take some of the heat out of these discussions. The fact that larger dogs can inflict more damage is a rather inconvenient truth to some anti-BSL campaigners but its a no brainer that needs to be acknowledged up front. Note also it discussed how victims can exacerbate an attack.. that's not a blame game, that's acknowledgement of how struggling triggers further aggression. Dog attack researchers commonly note two issues with breed ID: * It's notoriously unreliable * You need to factor in breed popularity before making conclusions about any breed's propensity for aggression. My personal view on the whole APBT thing is that people need to acknowledge: *It's a very powerful breed * It's commonly sought after by people keen to evoke a tough image (its the urban criminal's dog of choice) * There's a hell of a lot of ignorant and irresponsible folk involved in breeding and owning this dog * They are not being rigorously culled if they display aggression to people... The APBT is a victim of its image and there are many very poor examples of the breed. Driving it underground has compounded all the problems I've outlined above. Well said Poodlefan, except that I would not isolate it to the APBT. Dangerous, crossbred, large sized dogs of many types are sought after by the lunatics who want to own a dog that will rip the arms off people. Governments and the RSPCA have been hellbent on legislating many things in relation to dogs these last 10 years. And what has it done? Driven the problems underground. The rest of the dog world is now covered with a very long shadow that has been cast by unrealistic owners and breeders of dangerous dogs. Suffer little children. Pity the innocent victims who were jogging past an enraged dog's home. But they wont put their dog down until the worst happens. Meanwhile the lawmakers are still in office, still in their cosy well paid government jobs. Souff

Equipping yourself with knowledge of the research certainly helps take some of the heat out of these discussions. The fact that larger dogs can inflict more damage is a rather inconvenient truth to some anti-BSL campaigners but its a no brainer that needs to be acknowledged up front. Note also it discussed how victims can exacerbate an attack.. that's not a blame game, that's acknowledgement of how struggling triggers further aggression. Logic and acknowledgement of the factors are often lacking in the emotional arguments. Victims can certainly exacerbate an attack, and sometimes that is done by the victim trying to rescue their cat, their child, their small dog. I don't know what the woman did to annoy this dog, or why she did it, but I am not going to make excuses for a dog who did this. Souff

Good article Poodlefan. It talks about the size of the dog and the fact that more damage is done by a larger and more powerful animal, something which is rarely discussed. Souff

Oh I don't know ...... if the Cavvies think there is some food in the herd you might have half a chance of training them to be herding dogs Souff

No, i'd never argue that but do you really agree that the majority of aggression displayed in dogs is entirely genetic? Am I really the only one who thinks that the way we train and socialize our dogs is also integral?? Training and socialisation is vital. But if the wiring is there for the dog still to unpredictably "go off" then the former is of very limited value. Ever seen a dog attack and then appear to be sorry for its actions? I have. And the owner had done all of the right things. The dog went to God. And owner wished that they had taken the hard decision when they had seen the unpredictability upon maturity - before the dog attacked. Souff

Why? Dogs are not human. Souff

No, I think they could have dreamt up that one in Macquarie Street too, and KK could deliver it very convincingly in her usual puppet style. They already have laws about roaming dogs but hey, dont spoil their fun. They want to look like they are doing something. Souff

Ah,but the problem is they don't know the dogs have "this temperament". Well this woman knows now. And the parents of the little girl in Britain hopefully have now realised what some animals are capable of doing. Is this what it takes to make people realise that a dog is not fit to be kept as a pet? Souff

I couldnt agree more No, not wierd. OBSCENE. Dogs like this have no place in our society. Souff

Hey Poodlefan, have any of those ElSHonko Kennels dogs been returned yet ..... ? just wondering Souff