85 Year Old Woman Mauled

[Diva]

Trouble is I can choose to stay out of a dark alley. I can't control someone else's dog bursting out of a door unless I stay off the street altogether. I think the general public get frightened by these kind of dog attacks because they are in broad daylight, on people just walking down the street, and so apparently random. Human on human attacks that are stranger based and random scare us in the same way. Domestic violence or attacks from a known person don't cause so much angst because we all feel some control- we believe it won't happen to us - but this could have been anyone on the street that day. I don't find the comparative stats make much difference to people's thinking about the risk, it is particular types of unmitigatable risks that cause a reaction.

Edited August 23, 2013 by Diva

[mita]

Diva, I was just giving the dark alley scenario to illustrate a statistical notion re rate of biting across a population. Not to reflect a real life situation.... which is why I put statistically in italics.

Meanwhile, back to real life, as you rightly point to... The events where dog bites occur tend to be within home situations &, next, with dogs that are not contained or controlled so strangers in public places are involved. You're right, it's even more likely to be in daylight when most people are around.... & dogs, too.

What the pubic needs to know, is that owner responsibility looms behind most of what leads to dog bites/attacks. If these dogs burst out of a door & onto the street, it doesn't say much for how securely the dogs were contained on the property.

We should insist that current laws be enforced....& that owners be held responsible. As we hold drivers of cars responsible. Even starting with dog registration...& the conditions which go with that. Our renewal of registration notice always comes with a list of requirements in how your dog is to be contained....& how it's behaviour kept under control.

Edited August 23, 2013 by mita

[Loving my Oldies]

We should insist that current laws be enforced....& that owners be held responsible. As we hold drivers of cars responsible. Even starting with dog registration...& the conditions which go with that. Our renewal of registration notice always comes with a list of requirements in how your dog is to be contained....& how it's behaviour kept under control.

The microchipping laws were brought in in NSW 14 years ago and still there are animals presenting to pounds unchipped.

We don't need more legislation, just what we have enforced.

[seld]

At the risk of sounding judgemental, the suburb this happened in, Koongamia, is populated by a fair bit of riff raff (thats polite prison officer talk). I grew up in a few suburbs down and would walk and play through that area as a kid, and have had plenty of dogs run out of poorly secured yards to have a go at us through there. NOthing as serious as this incident though.

The shire doesn't persue dog registration unless there is a complaint.

[Diva]

Diva, I was just giving the dark alley scenario to illustrate a statistical notion re rate of biting across a population. Not to reflect a real life situation.... which is why I put statistically in italics

Yes, I knew how you were using it, I didn't even need the italics. I took your framing and used it to make my own point, which was that statistics across population are not what resonates with the average person, indeed they are essentially irrelevant in the public debate.

I entirely agree that we need existing laws enforced in full.

[Yonjuro]

THe incident is getting a heap of coverage across the media and the main news shows haven't started yet.

With this coming only a couple of weeks after the last serious attack that involved a dog described exactly the same as the ones here, we are no doubt going to be bombarded with cries for tighter legislation or changes. As our laws recently changed in June, this owner can probably expect prosecution to the full extent of the act.

This makes me sad for the elderly lady and her husband, and makes me angry at the owner.

Edited August 23, 2013 by Yonjuro

[Yonjuro]

Nothing mentioned about any attack to the throat in the news report, so dunno what that was about on the radio??

[RallyValley]

At the risk of sounding judgemental, the suburb this happened in, Koongamia, is populated by a fair bit of riff raff (thats polite prison officer talk). I grew up in a few suburbs down and would walk and play through that area as a kid, and have had plenty of dogs run out of poorly secured yards to have a go at us through there. NOthing as serious as this incident though.

The shire doesn't persue dog registration unless there is a complaint.

I agree Koongamia is a low socio-economic area however the article said the attack happened on Scott St which is a busy street where three suburbs (Koongamia and two higher socio-economic areas Boya and Helena Valley) intersect so not a street you would expect loose dogs. I have walked my dogs along Scott St many times without issues.

Very close to home and sad to read. I hope the lady is not someone I know from around the neighbourhood

Edited August 23, 2013 by RallyValley

[seld]

At the risk of sounding judgemental, the suburb this happened in, Koongamia, is populated by a fair bit of riff raff (thats polite prison officer talk). I grew up in a few suburbs down and would walk and play through that area as a kid, and have had plenty of dogs run out of poorly secured yards to have a go at us through there. NOthing as serious as this incident though.

The shire doesn't persue dog registration unless there is a complaint.

I agree Koongamia is a low socio-economic area however the article said the attack happened on Scott St which is a busy street where three suburbs (Koongamia and two higher socio-economic areas Boya and Helena Valley) intersect so not a street you would expect loose dogs. I have walked my dogs along Scott St many times without issues.

Very close to home and sad to read. I hope the lady is not someone I know from around the neighbourhood

Trus, I used to ride my horse down Scott street from the old bridle path that intersects it just south of Greenmount Library, and much of my family still live in Helena Valley. Its still such a small community despite the new estates. Isnt the old hospital now an elderly respite care centre? She may have been from there.

[RallyValley]

At the risk of sounding judgemental, the suburb this happened in, Koongamia, is populated by a fair bit of riff raff (thats polite prison officer talk). I grew up in a few suburbs down and would walk and play through that area as a kid, and have had plenty of dogs run out of poorly secured yards to have a go at us through there. NOthing as serious as this incident though.

The shire doesn't persue dog registration unless there is a complaint.

I agree Koongamia is a low socio-economic area however the article said the attack happened on Scott St which is a busy street where three suburbs (Koongamia and two higher socio-economic areas Boya and Helena Valley) intersect so not a street you would expect loose dogs. I have walked my dogs along Scott St many times without issues.

Very close to home and sad to read. I hope the lady is not someone I know from around the neighbourhood

Trus, I used to ride my horse down Scott street from the old bridle path that intersects it just south of Greenmount Library, and much of my family still live in Helena Valley. Its still such a small community despite the new estates. Isnt the old hospital now an elderly respite care centre? She may have been from there.

Yes there is now a senior's home where the old hospital was in Greenmount, so that is very possible. I grew up in Helena Valley and still have family there and in Boya, it's an insular little community there :) .

[Christina]

This is an awful event but regarding comments about enforcing dog laws etc I still wonder why we had less dog attacks 50 years ago as an example but we didn't have all these laws & controls ? Dogs were welcome almost everywhere & not confined & isolated as much.

Obviously the laws & the way we rear & keep our dogs in society is not working.

Having a dog registered does not alter its potential to attack.

The genetics & owners lifestyle, treatment & handling of the dog have more influence.

Hope the poor lady is ok. How terrifying for her.

[Santo66]

A police spokeswoman said she understood the dogs were a Staffordshire Terrier/Bull Mastiff cross, and were unregistered

What's new.........the old BYB Bully again.........the poor old lady was a threat, she spooked the dogs, what's the excuse this time for these dogs taking down an innocent person

[sandgrubber]

1377240950[/url]' post='6282884']

1377239914[/url]' post='6282873']

if we're comparable to the USA (which we are in pretty much all other Animal Management stats) then it's not worse now that it was some years ago :)

Two doctors from Brisbane hospitals did an over-view of treatment of bites (From the Australian Provider).

The annual incidence of dog bites requiring emergency department treatment is 12.9 per 10 000 persons, with children aged 5-9 (particularly boys) having an incidence of 60.7 per 10 000 persons aged 5-9 years. Face, neck and head bites are more frequent in children.1

If only the annual incidence of human -on- human injuries, needing medical treatment, was so low. Hospital emergency departments are flooded with them..

Looks like if you're in a dark alley, statistically, you're better off meeting a dog than a person. But not quite so better off, if you're a child....or an elderly person.

I wouldn't say those numbers are low. With around 1.3 million people aged 5 to 9 in Australia, that would mean ~7800 hospitalization a per year. Suggesting that only a small fraction make the news.

Edited August 23, 2013 by sandgrubber

[Rosetta]

Poor old lady. Even if she survives the attack her life will be shortened now as a result of this. Perhaps the elderly and very young are particularly vulnerable as dogs sense they are weaker? Much the same as some dogs will attack another who is experiencing a seizure.

[Clyde]

Poor old lady. Even if she survives the attack her life will be shortened now as a result of this.

I agree No doubt with some sort of PTSD too.

So sad for all involved. I saw one of the dogs being carried out to the car and in to a crate, her little tail was wagging the whole time

[korbin13]

Good to hear that woman is at least in a stable condition.

http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/elderly-dog-attack-victim-in-stable-condition-20130824-2si4n.html

An elderly woman who was treated for life-threatening injuries following an early morning attack by two dogs is in stable condition.

The woman, 82, was walking with her husband in Scott Street, Koongamia on Friday when the two unregistered female dogs, American staffordshire bull terrier-bull mastiff crosses, charged from a house and attacked her.

A hospital spokesperson at Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital said on Saturday morning the woman was in stable condition.

The woman received head injuries during the attack and lost a lot of blood.

Advertisement

The dogs have since been impounded by the City of Swan, where they will remain while the council's customer advocate officers investigate the incident to determine the dogs' fate.

"It's a very serious attack," a police spokeswoman said.

She said the owner of the dogs was home at the time and it's believed he tried to intervene.

Tougher penalties will apply for offences involving dangerous dogs under proposed new laws that were introduced to the WA parliament in June.

[dancinbcs]

This is an awful event but regarding comments about enforcing dog laws etc I still wonder why we had less dog attacks 50 years ago as an example but we didn't have all these laws & controls ? Dogs were welcome almost everywhere & not confined & isolated as much.

Obviously the laws & the way we rear & keep our dogs in society is not working.

Having a dog registered does not alter its potential to attack.

The genetics & owners lifestyle, treatment & handling of the dog have more influence.

Hope the poor lady is ok. How terrifying for her.

We had less attacks 50 years ago because the dog breeds around then were very different. No SBTs, Pitbulls, Amstaffs, Rotties, Mastiffs of any kind, or crosses of these, were owned as pets and many of those breeds had not been imported. There were GSDs but the public were scared of them due to the notion of them crossing with Dingos and owners tended to keep them well confined. The only terriers around were Foxies and Scotties and the bulk of other breeds were Cockers and Labs in the city and Cattle Dogs and Kelpies in the country. There were lots of small/medium heinz 57 variety mongrels but no large powerful dogs available to moron owners. Unfortunately the reason for these attacks is the type of dogs being bred and sold to the public who have no idea what owning them entails. They are all powerful agile dogs that have no trouble escaping the average suburban yard and have the tendency to attack with no provocation. I do not buy the notion of not blaming the breed, it is too late after an attack to blame the deed. We need to stop the deeds from happening in the first place. Any dog can bite but there is a huge difference between a warning nip or bite in play from an overexcited dog, to a full scale attack by a powerful dog that grabs and shakes their victim, leaving them dead or scarred and traumatised for life.

[sandgrubber]

This is an awful event but regarding comments about enforcing dog laws etc I still wonder why we had less dog attacks 50 years ago as an example but we didn't have all these laws & controls ? Dogs were welcome almost everywhere & not confined & isolated as much.

Obviously the laws & the way we rear & keep our dogs in society is not working.

Having a dog registered does not alter its potential to attack.

The genetics & owners lifestyle, treatment & handling of the dog have more influence.

Hope the poor lady is ok. How terrifying for her.

We had less attacks 50 years ago because the dog breeds around then were very different. No SBTs, Pitbulls, Amstaffs, Rotties, Mastiffs of any kind, or crosses of these, were owned as pets and many of those breeds had not been imported. There were GSDs but the public were scared of them due to the notion of them crossing with Dingos and owners tended to keep them well confined. The only terriers around were Foxies and Scotties and the bulk of other breeds were Cockers and Labs in the city and Cattle Dogs and Kelpies in the country. There were lots of small/medium heinz 57 variety mongrels but no large powerful dogs available to moron owners. Unfortunately the reason for these attacks is the type of dogs being bred and sold to the public who have no idea what owning them entails. They are all powerful agile dogs that have no trouble escaping the average suburban yard and have the tendency to attack with no provocation. I do not buy the notion of not blaming the breed, it is too late after an attack to blame the deed. We need to stop the deeds from happening in the first place. Any dog can bite but there is a huge difference between a warning nip or bite in play from an overexcited dog, to a full scale attack by a powerful dog that grabs and shakes their victim, leaving them dead or scarred and traumatised for life.

I was told by an old guy that the WA two dog rule came about (~1970) because Perth metro was growing rapidly and lots of people coming in from the bush brought their pig dogs and roo dogs with them. Result, lots of wandering dogs and lots of attacks. If this is true, and it may not be, it sort of suggests that there were more than cattle dogs and kelpies in the country. It also suggests that legislation, though unpopular, has helped in the past.

Edited August 24, 2013 by sandgrubber

[Clyde]

This is an awful event but regarding comments about enforcing dog laws etc I still wonder why we had less dog attacks 50 years ago as an example but we didn't have all these laws & controls ? Dogs were welcome almost everywhere & not confined & isolated as much.

Obviously the laws & the way we rear & keep our dogs in society is not working.

Having a dog registered does not alter its potential to attack.

The genetics & owners lifestyle, treatment & handling of the dog have more influence.

Hope the poor lady is ok. How terrifying for her.

We had less attacks 50 years ago because the dog breeds around then were very different. No SBTs, Pitbulls, Amstaffs, Rotties, Mastiffs of any kind, or crosses of these, were owned as pets and many of those breeds had not been imported. There were GSDs but the public were scared of them due to the notion of them crossing with Dingos and owners tended to keep them well confined. The only terriers around were Foxies and Scotties and the bulk of other breeds were Cockers and Labs in the city and Cattle Dogs and Kelpies in the country. There were lots of small/medium heinz 57 variety mongrels but no large powerful dogs available to moron owners. Unfortunately the reason for these attacks is the type of dogs being bred and sold to the public who have no idea what owning them entails. They are all powerful agile dogs that have no trouble escaping the average suburban yard and have the tendency to attack with no provocation. I do not buy the notion of not blaming the breed, it is too late after an attack to blame the deed. We need to stop the deeds from happening in the first place. Any dog can bite but there is a huge difference between a warning nip or bite in play from an overexcited dog, to a full scale attack by a powerful dog that grabs and shakes their victim, leaving them dead or scarred and traumatised for life.

This made me think about my recent trip to Tahiti and Bora Bora. Lots of street dogs in Tahiti and lots of owned, but poorly cared for dogs in Bora Bora. In Bora Bora most of the dogs were bull breed types and there were also a lot of pure looking APBT's. The dogs all roam, a few tense moments when they stepped in to another dogs territory, but no fights. The local kids get right in the dogs faces, doing things which would make me freak out. The dogs dont always knows the kids either (we had a 9yr old cousin with us who was shoving her face right in to dogs) and the dogs just take it all in their stride. I mean, these dogs were everywhere - they follow their owners in to the village, owners go in to shops, dogs wander off and find their own way home later. However my other cousin who lives there, said there is never a problem. Makes you wonder that all that roaming makes the dogs more social with each other and people, whereas here, our dogs are all confined, not socialised as much etc etc and we are starting to see more serious problems. Not that I'm saying open your gates, but I think it says something about the way we keep our dogs these days.

[Christina]

This is an awful event but regarding comments about enforcing dog laws etc I still wonder why we had less dog attacks 50 years ago as an example but we didn't have all these laws & controls ? Dogs were welcome almost everywhere & not confined & isolated as much.

Obviously the laws & the way we rear & keep our dogs in society is not working.

Having a dog registered does not alter its potential to attack.

The genetics & owners lifestyle, treatment & handling of the dog have more influence.

Hope the poor lady is ok. How terrifying for her.

We had less attacks 50 years ago because the dog breeds around then were very different. No SBTs, Pitbulls, Amstaffs, Rotties, Mastiffs of any kind, or crosses of these, were owned as pets and many of those breeds had not been imported. There were GSDs but the public were scared of them due to the notion of them crossing with Dingos and owners tended to keep them well confined. The only terriers around were Foxies and Scotties and the bulk of other breeds were Cockers and Labs in the city and Cattle Dogs and Kelpies in the country. There were lots of small/medium heinz 57 variety mongrels but no large powerful dogs available to moron owners. Unfortunately the reason for these attacks is the type of dogs being bred and sold to the public who have no idea what owning them entails. They are all powerful agile dogs that have no trouble escaping the average suburban yard and have the tendency to attack with no provocation. I do not buy the notion of not blaming the breed, it is too late after an attack to blame the deed. We need to stop the deeds from happening in the first place. Any dog can bite but there is a huge difference between a warning nip or bite in play from an overexcited dog, to a full scale attack by a powerful dog that grabs and shakes their victim, leaving them dead or scarred and traumatised for life.

This made me think about my recent trip to Tahiti and Bora Bora. Lots of street dogs in Tahiti and lots of owned, but poorly cared for dogs in Bora Bora. In Bora Bora most of the dogs were bull breed types and there were also a lot of pure looking APBT's. The dogs all roam, a few tense moments when they stepped in to another dogs territory, but no fights. The local kids get right in the dogs faces, doing things which would make me freak out. The dogs dont always knows the kids either (we had a 9yr old cousin with us who was shoving her face right in to dogs) and the dogs just take it all in their stride. I mean, these dogs were everywhere - they follow their owners in to the village, owners go in to shops, dogs wander off and find their own way home later. However my other cousin who lives there, said there is never a problem. Makes you wonder that all that roaming makes the dogs more social with each other and people, whereas here, our dogs are all confined, not socialised as much etc etc and we are starting to see more serious problems. Not that I'm saying open your gates, but I think it says something about the way we keep our dogs these days.

Exactly. No we can't let them roam & be part of the community. We are past that now.

As a child in the UK in the 50's I saw lots of roaming dogs too. People often opened their door & let the dog out & it came back unless it got run over. We knew not to annoy them & which ones were most friendly.

Its not a thing I would ever do, its not safe for the dog. More worried about what people would do than what my dogs would do & obviously not an acceptable practise but I do wish dogs were not banned from so many places due to hygiene phobias or whatever other reasons. In the UK as a young adult my dog went everywhere with me, clothes shopping, in the pub, on the bus, train, even some food shops let them in. It was up to the owner it seemed.