Diablo

Yes of course these high prey dogs can be great pets Greytmate, but alot need more than the average family pet, from as you say, very committed owners, as you say.

Which is the point we were trying to make, when the dogs are trained for these test's overseas from the Breed Clubs, because as you say, they need the high prey drive to do it.

But I guess its why these dogs having undergone these tests, and passing them, are imported to keep these strong drives in our dogs here

But then again in saying what you have about getting a different breed Greytmate, not all Wei's are like that,are they, so the average family can still get the breed of their choice, or do they tend to be high maintenence breed???? ( as in high prey drive I mean)The ones I have had to do with havnt been over the top.

Or is it in a general sense, like the GSd's more just some lines, that are like this??

This is what many people don't understand with the GSD Carlibud, those high prey drive lines are not correct either, they are bred to extremes in the same fashion as the GSD's with little prey drive at all. A good well balanced GSD can do it all, an "all rounder" is what they are supposed to be and is what the breed's versatility is all about. A good GSD could have been taken down the career path as a guard dog or a search and rescue dog or herding dog etc. The same dog had it been purchased by a pet owner could take on the role of a child's playmate and family companion and do that job just as well.

In other words, a good well bred and balanced GSD should have the genetic quality to take on "any" of the roles that the breed standards describe, not all at once from the same dog as training routines for specific jobs can increase or suppress certian traits and abilities, but any good quality puppy should be able to be assigned to any of the breeds given roles, trained accordingly and do the job well. :D

You are right Diablo the GSD is an all rounder, but you have to admit that most dogs that are seen by the average people are either the quieter family pets or the over the top high maintence hyper dog that needs occupying 24/7

Only us that own them really see the joining of the two

Which goes for all breeds anyway I guess.

I agree with Lilli though that if a breed as a whole is the same, dont get one if thats not the temp you want, but with other breeds that do have the quieter version, for the want of a better word ,we should be able to get the quieter lines or the higher prey drive,what ever suits our wants and/or needs but that is JMO of course.

I love the GSD's they are my breed, but I personally dont like the high maintence lines, I love my quieter, family pet types LOL But again thats my choice of what I want in my breed, whether it be incorrect or not ;) By some that is.

As they saying goes which is very true Carlibud, the GSD is not the best dog at any one task, there are breeds that can do one task better, but the GSD is second best at "everything"

What shits me thnough is when they respond with something like "If he's aggressive he should be muzzled". Why should my dog be muzzled if he walks at heel, sits at the curb, stays on leash etc and only reacts to other dogs- does not instigate anything?????

I disagree...I think if your dog reacts aggressively towards all dogs and you could not stop a fight from happening if another dog simply approached, then yes I think they should be muzzled.

If either of my dogs consistently showed dog aggression to every dog that approached they would definitely be wearing a muzzle when out.

My dogs don't love every dog they meet, but I know what kinds of dogs they play best with, I also only take my dogs to a very quiet off-leash area, where they may only see 1 or 2 other dogs at most. For me I know that Jessie is OTT with trying to round up small dogs so I now leash her around them if she is too interested in them. Jessie normally has good recall (especially when i've remembered to bring treats) so that is very easy to manage. For Tilly I know that she doesn't tolerate boisterous in your face dogs or anxious dogs, so I try to move away at the park or i'll get Tilly swimming instead, and by the time she paddles back the dog is normally gone.

There are no laws that prevents the ownership of dog aggressive dogs and the law is that the dogs don't react unecessarily which is what a responsible owner abides by. Most owners of DA dog's will avoid other dogs, cross the road, or exercise in areas away from other dogs etc and will always be on leash. The only dogs that could approach a DA dog in those situations is a dog that shouldn't be approaching if it's owner abided by the law, generally an off leash dog with an owner that has no control and recall. I don't agree that a DA dog should be muzzled to enable law breakers to do as they please in safety.

With the number of breeds whose 'job' is companionship, certainly people who do not want a high drive high energy breed can pick one of those instead of people watering down the smaller number of working breeds? Why change the breed so that it is less likely to be able to work just so that joe public can handle it?

Wow!!!, now we are talking sense.........Kavik, your comment in my opinion is 101% correct, great post

Yes of course these high prey dogs can be great pets Greytmate, but alot need more than the average family pet, from as you say, very committed owners, as you say.

Which is the point we were trying to make, when the dogs are trained for these test's overseas from the Breed Clubs, because as you say, they need the high prey drive to do it.

But I guess its why these dogs having undergone these tests, and passing them, are imported to keep these strong drives in our dogs here

But then again in saying what you have about getting a different breed Greytmate, not all Wei's are like that,are they, so the average family can still get the breed of their choice, or do they tend to be high maintenence breed???? ( as in high prey drive I mean)The ones I have had to do with havnt been over the top.

Or is it in a general sense, like the GSd's more just some lines, that are like this??

This is what many people don't understand with the GSD Carlibud, those high prey drive lines are not correct either, they are bred to extremes in the same fashion as the GSD's with little prey drive at all. A good well balanced GSD can do it all, an "all rounder" is what they are supposed to be and is what the breed's versatility is all about. A good GSD could have been taken down the career path as a guard dog or a search and rescue dog or herding dog etc. The same dog had it been purchased by a pet owner could take on the role of a child's playmate and family companion and do that job just as well.

In other words, a good well bred and balanced GSD should have the genetic quality to take on "any" of the roles that the breed standards describe, not all at once from the same dog as training routines for specific jobs can increase or suppress certian traits and abilities, but any good quality puppy should be able to be assigned to any of the breeds given roles, trained accordingly and do the job well.

A very sad story that happened recently in Canberra. An acquaintance was walking his dog aggressive GSD on-lead when a small terrier type dog who was off lead rushed at him and started to bark, snarl and generally be aggressive. The GSD retaliated and ended up picking up the terrier in his jaws and badly damaged (I'm not sure if it was actually killed) it. The owner of the GSD could not get the dog to drop the terrier and was verbally attacked by the owner of the terrier and by-standers, so he immediately took the GSD to the vet and had him PTS. The family were devastated, naturally, but the owner said he couldn't take the chance of it happening again and maybe to a child.

Hi leighw,

I almost seen the same thing in Queanbeyan a few weeks ago.

People who walk an aggressive (DA only I think) GSD were walking passed my house when another couple who own a JRTx (that is never ever onleash and just as aggressive) were walking by. The JRTx raced at the GSD barking and growling and the people with GSD turned to walk in the other direction and crossed the road but the JRTx just kept running in at the GSD trying to snap at it.

I ended up walking out and yelling to the people with the JRTx to "keep it on a lead like the law states they have to."

The JRTx was ignoring it's owners but pulled it's head in when I yelled. Once I noticed I yelled at it again and it ran back to owners who picked it up. The lady owner yelled back and told me to shut up, so I just said "well I'm calling the police now"

They took off and by then GSD was safely down the road but I was so scared it was going to turn out bad at one point.

The people with the GSD have been really trying hard and doing a great job. He looks great and his behaviour has improved since I first seen them walking a few months ago. (I think he is only young, maybe around 2yo to 3yo) I would hate to see something happen to him because the idiot JRTx owners are always walking offlead. (they don't even have a lead with them or a collar on the JRTx to grab him).

People are naturally concerned about what their on leash dog may do, but on leash you are 99.9% safe from wrong doings. If an incident occures from the cause of someone breaking the law having their dog off leash, the on leash dog/owners are not at fault even to the extreme of the on leash dog killing a dog off leash or even biting a person, having a leash around it's neck is the major factor in defence of any reactions that the dog may have done.

Frankly the "friendly" dogs are often just as much trouble as the more aggro ones if their owners aren't on the ball.

I agree completely.

In fact I think abnormally sociable dogs can and do contribute to dog aggression problems in other dogs. They have poor social skills and lack boundaries or respect for personal space. I don't know how many dogs I've seen not back off when asked politely so the usually polite dog suddenly learns to become impolite, which leads to all sorts of problems if not handled with consideration.

Totally agree Aidan The amount of truely sociable friendly dogs that have no manners or respect for other dogs personal space is a major problem. Even to the point where a dog isn't enjoying the attention from another dog and may growl and snarl as warning to go away, the other dog doesn't get the message and keep at it until aggression surfaces.

A very sad story that happened recently in Canberra. An acquaintance was walking his dog aggressive GSD on-lead when a small terrier type dog who was off lead rushed at him and started to bark, snarl and generally be aggressive. The GSD retaliated and ended up picking up the terrier in his jaws and badly damaged (I'm not sure if it was actually killed) it. The owner of the GSD could not get the dog to drop the terrier and was verbally attacked by the owner of the terrier and by-standers, so he immediately took the GSD to the vet and had him PTS. The family were devastated, naturally, but the owner said he couldn't take the chance of it happening again and maybe to a child.

What an irresponsible owner of that poor GSD to give his dogs life for his own stupidity Thing is, you can't take the chance 100% with any dog and the faster people learn this the better. Although it would be upsetting for my dog to hurt another dog in those circumstances it's legally bad luck if an on leash dog attacks an off leash dog who rushes at it. The off leash dog/owner is at fault without question. Large dogs especially guardian breeds when it comes to a scrap will win which is simply the "law of the jungle", and people with smaller dogs who cannot control them properly should NEVER have them off leash or in a position to rush at other dogs with the physical power to badly injure or kill them if things go wrong. It's too late to cry about the big nasty on leash dog that got their uncontrollable ankle biter which they need to think about before letting their dogs of leash in the first place.

Very good post Shadow Walker.

Please Diablo dont let this thread end in a Sch debate, which has nothing to do with what the breed was bred for, its only a test isnt it and that wasnt what this thread was started for Thanks

What has this post got to do with the topic may I ask Carlibud???

I agree that breeders should be honest about what they do. I dont know about everyone but I think most breeders talk at length with their puppy buyers about what they have done with the dogs, they also hopefully should ask them what they want the puppy for. If the buyer wants something specific they need to be honest with the breeder when they come to see the dogs.

Im one of the people that dont think that Schutzhund is the ONLY way (although a good way if you have access to it) to test a GSD to see if it fits. That for me is where the arguements start as I am condemed by others for having weak nerved dogs. I think I put alot of effort in finding other ways to test this in my dogs that I use for breeding.

For example a dog can be assessed by a proffessional well recognised trainer to see if the drives exist (a dog with weak nerve or low drive is easily spotted then). I think the best ultimate way though is for that dog to be tested in real life.

A GSD is an all rounder and in my IMHO needs to be exposed to all sorts of challanges not just sport but as much as humanly possible. A dog that comes out on the other side of this calm and self assured regardless is in my books a good example of the breed. The dog takes everything in its stride every single day and adapts to what ever his/her master requires.

Id like to see more available for us to use for assessment (certainly would make life easier) but in the mean time I will continue to use what I can as a way for assessment and explain this to the buyer and let them make up their own mind. I have yet to have a compaint.

I do not see my dogs as inferior and weak in any way and considering where they have been placed what they have done I am quite proud of their "work ability".

The Schutzhund testing routine is not the only way that a GSD can be evaluated for type and correctness I agree Shadow Walker, I believe in that statement you are correct. Most if not all of the Australian service/police and security dogs are not Schutzhund titled which accounts for most of the service dogs overseas also. Schutzhund as a testing process does provide multi tasking phases that when used as a test, does evaluate a dogs strengths, weaknesess and correctness fairly quickly. It provides a uniformity in procedure where external tests may result in incorrect overall assessment. Tests set by individuals will vary considerably and may be too easy or too hard for the average good example of the breed to pass. The "uniformity" of the Schutzund test provides a level playing field for each and every dog tested to be put through exactly the same paces across the board, and as a testing standard, the Schutzhund test provides that advantage.

The training phase of Schutzhund is essentially what weeds out the faulty dogs, not the finished product, as the finished product can be overly polished by exceptional training and effort. Overly weak nerved dogs with temperament issues surface in Schutzhund obediance being the basic stage. As a breed worthiness tool, many would fail the basic of tests to be deemed not suitable for breeding as the basic stage is generally commenced with a green dog. A dog has to pass one phase in order to be promoted to the next and easliy determines the dog's character as training evolves.

A madatory standard test like Schutzhund provides transparency in the GSD world which openly demonstrates the breedworthiness of particular blood lines. If for example "Mary vom Showdog" was up for testing and she feared the jumps and was fear aggressive with other dogs, it would openly expose that Mary is not a bitch you would want puppies from and word of mouth alone would eliminate her from reproducing her faults. There are many other areas where testing standards provide advantages also. A certificate of proof that a dog has passed the required tests for breedworthiness does hold a higher rating than a breeders opinion of the quality of their breeding stock which may not be correct.

Personally I think quite a few folk who think their 'show' line dogs can work are deluding themselves.

A beautiful but timid Dobermann, a GSD that hides behind its owners legs when strangers approach, a hard mouthed Retriever.. they're all out there.

There is an old wives tale that says the darker a Golden Retriever, the greater it's instinct for work. Makes you wonder where that breed is heading.

My view if the dog can work, show us

It's complicated, and the world changes. It's inspiring to see a kelpie or BC working sheep, or a huskie pulling a sled or cart. But what would you say about a Labbie who aces Guide Dog training and ends out with a full-time job . . . but has a hard mouth, no interest in birds, and doesn't like water? or becomes a sniffer dog, or a truffle hunting dog? or simply acts as the welcoming committee for a boutique winery? Or a bluey who isn't all that good with livestock, but makes a wonderful guard dog? As for the breeds whose work was fighting or bear baiting, or some other awful blood sport, so glad most of them no longer do the work they're bred for. Or hunting runaway slaves (Filho brasilieoro). What of the dogs who were originally cart dogs or spit dogs . . . and the RSPCA saw their work banned in the 19th or early 20th century . .. . I think many would be happy if something like their work was brought back as dog sport.

Many dogs like to have a job to do and most people like to see a dog doing a job. As the landscape changes, the function of dogs changes. Much as I admire old-fashioned working dogs, I don't think we need to direct all breeding to creating museum replicas of 19th century working dogs: Especially given that most puppy buyers just want a healthy companion with some-sort-of personality and a certain look. Great if some breeders want to concentrate on the work described in the breed standard . . . but no need to condemn those who take another path. And I think we need to work harder to develop new jobs for dogs to do as their historical functions become obsolete.

I am in favour of temperament testing . . . ring presence is not a great sorter for temperament. But I think there's room for tests that go broader than testing for the breed's historical function.

I agree with the Sandgrubber's statement (bolded) which raises an answer to the OP's question regarding the continual slamming of GSD breedings. It's not an issue if some GSD breeders take a path away from the full working standards to suit a popular market, but the issue is created when those breeders fail to disclose what they are breeding for. Taking a path contrary to the breed standards is not "breeding to type" or reproducing good examples of the breed as some breeders have us believe. If they were honest about their breeding paths, much of the heated exchanges and condemnation would be greatly reduced.

'poodlefan' date='2nd Jan 2010 - 05:52 PM' post='4227781']

The German Shepherd was, as I understand it, always a multi-purpose dog that herded, protected and was always amenable to command. Herding and Obedience at least test some skills. Placing a pup from your breeding with the police or military would be another. Any dog sport shows that a dog has some confidence, biddabilty and general soundness. Every GSD we've had start agility at our club in recent years(not that we see many) has had an issue with one of those and/or with dog aggression. My concerns about the direction the GSD is being taken didn't come out of thin air.

That's "exactly" what we have noticed with GSD's at our Schutzhund club which from a breeders perspective is the result of poor initial training and socialisation which is not always the case. Some believe that their GSD displaying fear aggression are police K9 candidates and will do well at Schutzhund because of it. What happens is, when the defence drive is suppressed in the dog with training to enable the dog to be taken onto the field and not react towards other dogs and people present, also lost is any prey drive that the dog had along with the fear, lack of confidence becoming visable. The nerve strength of working line GSD's is vastly superior on average than the showlines.........not in all cases, we have good and bad in both lines but on an average of what you see.

Then we have the "nice dogs", happy and friendly seemingly confident and sound that shut down with physical challenges, scared of the jumps, slip off the A board and run away from it thrashing around in frenzy on the leash if the handler leads the dog towards it again etc etc. Most of the GSD's with obvious genetic faults are wonderful pets..........no question in regard to their companion ability or perception of protection fearing anything that doesn't belong, but are way from dogs of balanced temperament. Some owners are shocked when submitting their dog to the basic of working tasks having purchased a dog of supposed quality that is bred to type and standard. These faults don't often surface in a family pet and until worked, no one including the breeder is any the wiser what their dog's correctness is really like. The breed survey process doesn't always uncover these faults where a working test does immediately. A dog that fails breed survey temperament testing is a shocker, defininetly shouldn't be bred, but the one's that do doesn't necessarily confirm without a working test that the dog is of correct standard and an "assumption" is made from that result.

The working dog people experienced with GSD's often conclude that a herding test will pronounce the basic elements in the dog's genetic makup where only dogs of sound character, temperament and courage have the ability to herd which makes sense???. A fearful dog lacking nerve and confidence I don't imagine could herd either???.

I always assumed all dog lapped up water ... until we got the little brat.

When he drinks he submerges his muzzle/head up to his eyes (or sometime over his eyes) and drinks his water that way. Obviously if the water is not that deep then he will lap up the water but his preference is submerging his head.

Is there any other dogs out there that drinks this way or is my boy just abnormal ...

My GSD on occasion still submerges his muzzle and spashes water all over the place at 2 1/2 years old. "Hey!!!! drink properly" is his command to lap nicely which he obey's but from a puppy, he used to stick his head in it, feet, tip the water bowl over...........generally a natural messy drinker :D

Personally I think quite a few folk who think their 'show' line dogs can work are deluding themselves."Interest" is not proof of working ability. It's an indicator only. A gundog that shows interest in birds (as do my poodles and Whippet) is not necessarily a gundog that will work at pointing, flushing or retrieving.

The proof of the instinct to work is working. If people are that convinced their dogs retain the aptitude there are ways to test it.

Personally I take my hat off to any breeder who both exhibits and works their dogs. They are few and far between and frankly I think if more people took an interest in the working side of their breeds there would be more opportunities to give dogs an outlet for their instinct and a better standard of dog in the long run.

Somewhere between "bench" and "working' lines there is an overlap. Where that overlap sits is where I think most breeders should be aiming for with their breed programs.

A beautiful but timid Dobermann, a GSD that hides behind its owners legs when strangers approach, a hard mouthed Retriever.. they're all out there.

If there were objective working tests for more breeds and a working and a CH title were required for GR CH I think many breeds would be in a far better position than they are today.

There is an old wives tale that says the darker a Golden Retriever, the greater it's instinct for work. Makes you wonder where that breed is heading.

Highlighted is the primary GSD argument that ignites the fire ;) My view if the dog can work, show us :D

Good post Poodlefan, I totally agree :D

'sandgrubber' date='2nd Jan 2010 - 09:42 AM' post='4226961']

I wish more breeds did formal temperament screening . . . for many of us, the only temperament testing done is in the show ring. I don't think that the combination of a) not showing aggression or noncompliance; and b) behaviour that shows liking a crowd and showing off in public is a good basis for selecting temperaments that should be passed on.

AS Sandgrubber describes is basically the temperament screening for GSD's in Australia and is one of the subjects as the OP has mentioned that causes volitile arguments discussing GSD breeding practices. The GSD does have a formal breedworthiness test and character assessment process originally devised by the breeds creators in Germany which developed into the Schutzhund test along with other tests which in Germany and many other countries is still used today as the mandatory screening process. Dogs that don't have the attributes and genetic quality to pass these tests are not permitted to be shown or bred and are recorded as such in the breed registeries. It doesn't mean dogs that fail are bad dogs, they can be great pets and companions, but it means they are faulty to the standard, and the type or fault must not be reproduced or a faulty dog be shown in the ring as a correct example of the breed.

Some believe that a GSD of correct type can be produced without the relevant screening processes in place, others argue that it can't be done. Ultimately it's when a GSD is used for it's intended work and fails it's job determines the breed quality and whether our screening process is right or wrong :D

I think it is ignorant to trust a large breed male dog at 16 months of age unsupervised. How can anyone say that they totally know and predict and trust a dog and how it will react to others at that stage of its social development? Only somebody with very limited dog knowledge would say that.

This was an accident just waiting to happen. If it didn't happen with this toddler, it probably would have happenned with another sometime over the next few months.

I had the impression that the dog had been at the salon for years???, then someone has said it was 16 months old???. I don't know anything about Huskies, but GSD's between 14 and 18 months of age is a crucial time for high supervison levels to mould them into adult hood.

However, there are people who can prevent these situations occurring with children if they use their brains and that's the parents........

AND the owners of the dogs can also use their brains and prevent these situations occurring!

The owner of the dog in this case has a duty of care towards the customers who come into the salon and has taken a risk by having a dog in the salon,

a risk that can have a very high cost for the dog, for the customers or for the owner.

This risk to all would not have been there if the dog had not been there.

That my friend is the bottom line.

Souff

Depends if you want your child exposed to a biting possibility. You can only trust your own judgement, not that of a dog owner and hope for the best???.

As a mother of a toddler, I am appalled at the "support" this dog is given, the blame placed on parents and toddler by some and the downplaying of the incident.

This dog is reported to have bitten a child, which required medical treatment. I don't care if the sirens were on or not, it doesn't change the fact the dog bit.

I take my toddler (nearly 3) the hairdressers with me all the time. It's safe. Because he's given clear boundaries and obviously some of us can control our children more than others can control their dogs. And in my opinion - hairdressers are for HUMANS. Dog groomers are for DOGS. I don't take my child to the hairdressers to teach them how to socialise with dogs.

I get so peeved with dog owners who think that we should all love their dogs as much as them, their dogs are taken to places where people (and children) are. My daughter was once nipped by a dog in a coffee shop. She wasn't even looking at it - she was sitting drinking her drink and it came under her chair from behind and nipped the back of her leg. Since when do dogs go to coffee shops. And hairdressers.

Seriously, love that we all love our dogs, but keep them in appropriate places.

Dogs today have almost become accessories. When I was a kid, the dog was what was found in the backyard, or in the park. Not the sodding shops !

I don't think what happened to your child in the coffee shop Slk, is what happened in the hair salon where the dog approached the child to bite her???. A dog biting an innocent child doesn't automatically deem the dog's at fault. It's up to the parents to teach a child how to behave around other peoples dogs like I was taught to leave them alone.

The dog did not approach the child. Three witnesses claims that the dog was in its' same poition when they saw the child crying - minding its own business.

What we are overlooking in this discussion is this: It doesn't matter who is at fault, but what does matter is that dogs have teeth and they can use them. Fine's, dogs PTS or a jail term doesn't bring back an eye for example, and correct scarring and trauma that a child can suffer from a bite........the deed's done, nothing can turn back the clock and undo it.

However, there are people who can prevent these situations occurring with children if they use their brains and that's the parents........that's really the bottom line in the true light of day.

Try this one, Diablo.

Do you have literacy problems? Do you have comprehension problems? Do you have minor aggression problems?

Thanks for trying Jed I had to give up due to sheer frustration. Could be a comprehension issue, but more likely plain old avoidance due to being unable to admit to being wrong.

Still trying to be cleaver Gareth

Obviously you are on a path to learn the hard way fondling other peoples dogs without permission...........so when you get bitten........don't whinge about it

You can't avoid having children in a hair salon. Whether you agree with it or not, the fact is people can and do bring their children with them to the salon. So it is the responsibility of the hairdressers to make sure they are not leaving dangerous things withing reach of small children.

I've never been to a salon where dangerous chemicals were not stored at height, or in locked cupboards or a seperate room with a closed door, and hairdressers keep their scissors, hot irons, and other dangerous equipment stored away in trolleys (or sitting on top of the trolley while in use).

Its simple really. If a child manages to get their hands on anything dangerous and gets hurt, then obviously someone has been irresponsible by leaving it where the child could get to it.

So that would mean IF the child was about to touch something dangerous, the business owner, (who by your thinking is responsible for the child) has FULL right to walk up and SMACK the child??

Most businesses have things kept up or away and it ISN'T because they are volunteering to take responsibilty for your children it is due to OH&S laws.

Exactly, they keep things where they should be safety reasons, so no one gets hurt. I never once said that business owners should be babysitting, and IF a child was about to touch something dangerous, of course they business owner shouldn't smack them, but the fact still remains that the child should not have had access to whatever that dangerous thing was in the first place.

What's wrong with the child being made to sit in a chair and behave............didn't do me any harm

I made that clear to begin with Gareth..........dog's deserve their personal space plus...........they are someone elses belonging. Do you see a nice car parked on the side of the road and jump in to see how it feels behind the wheel???........of course not and the same applies with someone else's dog which is not for the general public's pleasure.

Nothing is clear in your posts. You don't go to jail for fondling strange dogs, so still waiting for an answer to my question

how you can equate fondling a strange dog to interfering with/fondling a strange person

Now add to that, stealing or using other people's property doesn't equate either

I will leave you to your strange ponderings before my brain melts.

Try this one Gareth..........if it doesn't belong to you...........leave it alone, keep your hands off it

Try this one, Diablo.

Do you have literacy problems? Do you have comprehension problems? Do you have minor aggression problems?

If not, perhaps you would like to reread what you have written, or rethink your understanding of Gareth's post, and also reconsider your response? Was it appropriate? Was it valid?

Dog's deserve the right to their own personal space and too many times, people just can't resist the temptation not to leave other people's dogs alone. Public place or not, you can't interfere with another person...........you can't walk into a hair salon and fondle a hairdresser that takes your fancy.........why should anyone believe they have the rights to fondle someone elses dog then scream if the dog reacts???. I was taught from a very early age that we had our own dog to pat and to leave other peoples dogs alone.

That's what I wrote Jed............you don't agree with that???

There are no dog control laws in SA that reflect anything concering toddlers Greytmate This has been tested a few times in SA were basically a dog restrained by a person 16 years or older on a leash not exceeding 2 metres in length complies with the requirements of "effective control". Anything rushing at a dog in those circumstances and injured as a result has no legal responsibility against the dog owner.

Under SA law I refer purely as an example, had the salon dog been tethered to something in the shop on a 2 metre or shorter leash and the same situation occurred with a toddler approaching the dog and suffering an injury, the dog owner has committed no legal breach whatoever and the child's parent/carer is at fault in that instance.

Talking about SA law is irrelevant in a Victorian case.

But I don't understand your examples anyway. Are you talking about a law where for a dog to be under effective control it must be attached to a leash no longer than 2 metres in length, with the other end of the leash held by a person 16 years of age or older? Or are you telling us the law says that you can take dogs into public access areas and leave them tethered to buildings and unattended by anyone?

Correct. In a place where the public have lawful access, a dog must be under effective control either by a person 16 or over at the end of the leash or tethered to a fixture or enclosed in a structure or car where it can't escape to wander at large. It's lawful to tether a dog outside a shop for example.

Diablo it used to be that the owner also had to prove that the dog wasnt just aggressive and a threat to people - ie that it was provoked enough to bite said person or child. Different state and a while ago now.

Better yet if it was actually under control like locked away in a different area not accessible for the public.

We have taken our dogs to work for 30 years, but they don't have public access which avoids any situations like the salon incident. He cruises around the office area where six people have access and some work who are his friends and he is generally laying next to my wife's desk. My wife takes him out into the yard for exercise which has public access but he is always leashed outside of the office area. Our responsibility is to protect our dog from potential litigation at work, and free public access for a dog doesn't provide much defence should something go wrong and personally wouldn't take that risk.

Diablo this dog was unrestrained and under Victorian law. If the dog had been within 2 metres of its owner and attached to it by a lead, the owner would have had a better chance of avoiding his dog being approached by the toddler or stepping in between. In this case the owner was cutting hair, the toddler did what toddlers do when temptation is easily accessable to them. They went near the dog, and it seems nobody was watching closely enough to say what really happenned next.

This may have been the first time the dog reacted to a toddler, and by the looks of things it wasn't a huge display of aggression, just a bit of an over-reaction. Maybe the dog didn't feel well that day. It may not have been normal for that dog, but it is not outside normal dog behaviour. It is unacceptable so we can try to look for reasons for it we cannot make excuses for it. We cannot guarantee it will never happen again either.

I imagine the dog would be declared dangerous, and it will be up to the owner to maintain a positive attitude about that to make sure the dog continues to enjoy a good quality of life.

Dog control laws are a bit like pool fencing laws. Dogs and pools are great, and not intrinsicly harmful, but the responsiblity falls upon the owners of the dogs and the pools to provide a physical barrier to keep toddlers away

I am responding to your comment Greytmate, about the responsibility of dog owners to provide a physical barrier to keep toddlers away???. The salon dog off leash unrestrained is an issue I agree, but a tethered/chained dog can also injure a toddler if close enough, which is not the dog owners responsibility in such a case. Under SA law I refer purely as an example, had the salon dog been tethered to something in the shop on a 2 metre or shorter leash and the same situation occurred with a toddler approaching the dog and suffering an injury, the dog owner has committed no legal breach whatoever and the child's parent/carer is at fault in that instance.

I am thinking, would the child's injury have been prevented in the salon had the dog been tethered........possibly not in the circumstances???????.

Having spent a lot of time at public events with my dogs, I can say that the vast majority of children are taught to respect boundaries and do not rush over to strange dogs. Most kids understand that you don't just touch dogs belonging to other people, unless they are sure that it is ok. (Unfortunately, it seems that some kids are conditioned to think its ok if the dog is tiny and cute or fluffy)

But many toddlers suddenly do want to rush up to dogs. Unless they are physically restrained, they behave in a way that leaves them most vulnerable because they do not have the mental restraint that older children have. They rush towards things that interest them and they want to interact with interesting things.

Dog control laws are a bit like pool fencing laws. Dogs and pools are great, and not intrinsicly harmful, but the responsiblity falls upon the owners of the dogs and the pools to provide a physical barrier to keep toddlers away.

There are no dog control laws in SA that reflect anything concering toddlers Greytmate This has been tested a few times in SA were basically a dog restrained by a person 16 years or older on a leash not exceeding 2 metres in length complies with the requirements of "effective control". Anything rushing at a dog in those circumstances and injured as a result has no legal responsibility against the dog owner.

Try this one Gareth..........if it doesn't belong to you...........leave it alone, keep your hands off it

Do you go to jail for patting someone else's dog? Why do you not understand what I am asking you? It is not that difficult.

Here is my question for the third and last time.

how you can equate fondling a strange dog to interfering with/fondling a strange person

For pity's sake will you two take your silly argument privately and quit hijacking this thread.

And what relevence to the thread is your comment CavNrott???...........absolutely nothing........a pointless post

If you bothered to read my discussion with Gareth properly on this topic, it's about interferring with someone elses dog resulting in attack.............very relevent to the thread thanks