Dangerous dogs

January 24th, 2012 at 12:00 pm by David Farrar

The Herald reports:

The pregnant owner of an American pitbull which attacked a young girl in Rotorua reportedly lunged at the dog to save the 9-year-old.

Stevie-Rebecca Shipgood, 9, suffered deep cuts to her head and arm after a neighbour’s American bulldog attacked her in Rotorua on Sunday.

The dog’s owner, who did not want to be named, said his partner was walking the 2-year-old dog, Riley, on a lead about 2.30pm on Te Ngae Rd near Puketawhero Park in Rotorua.

on children (and adults) are horrifying. Even putting aside the dangerous breeds, even the nicest domesticated animal can lash out in certain circumstances. Normally it requires significant provocation, but for some animals it requires none. Plus of course, some animals can not do a great deal of harm as they are so small.

The last Government did a knee-jerk response to the issue with micro-chipping. As far as I can tell, it has made no difference at all. Sadly they seem to be equally knee-jerk now, with Damien O’Connor blogging at Red Alert:

It is about time we stopped pussyfooting around and advocated and implemented the destruction of any dog and breed of dog that is considered dangerous in New Zealand.

Is Damien really advocating that the Government pro-actively shoot every dog in New Zealand that is considered dangerous?

I tend to think dog owners are as much an issue, as the dogs themselves. Not in every case, such as the one reported above. But all too often, the owner is an issue.

It is worth looking at whether certain breeds which are known to consistently attack people should be banned, but you would need to grand-father in existing pets, as I don’t think killing dogs that have done nothing wrong is acceptable. Requiring them not to be bred or imported should eliminate them over time.

Tags: ,

50 Responses to “Dangerous dogs”

  1. Graeme Edgeler (3,216 comments) says:

    Is Damien really advocating that the Government pro-actively shoot every dog in New Zealand that is considered dangerous?

    No. I don’t see a reference to shooting at all.

    [DPF: Well stabbing them to death would be rather messy. You could try lethal injection but good luck getting the nice pit bull to stay still for the jab]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Tautaioleua (266 comments) says:

    Sadly, those in favour of banning certain breeds are twenty years too late. The SPCA called for such bans as far back as 1990, particularly for the American Pit-bull. Because of the rate of interbreeding since then, who’s to say that half and quarter breeds aren’t as deadly now?

    We missed the boat on breed banning. Now, our only option is to crack down on negligent owners who spend less than an hour a week with their animals. These are the owners that are breeding dogs with little to no human interaction in the first place, and are more likely to attack when it’s all said and done.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Deborah (155 comments) says:

    Requiring certain dog breeds to be muzzled when off their owner’s property would help.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. tvb (3,938 comments) says:

    I thinks the laws on dangerous dogs needs to get much much tougher. I would like to see the extermination of all dogs that could cause significant harm to children and adults and treat them as if they are a lethal weapon. That would leave working dogs, special breeds and small yappers. The rest can be exterminated.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. iiq374 (262 comments) says:

    The reaction to dog attacks every time it happens – and the fact that it centres on breed almost every time P*sses me off no end.

    Overseas studies have repeatedly shown no statistical significance in using breed as a determinant of dog attacks (beyond their underlying proportions in the local dog population).

    However they HAVE consistently shown that between 80-87% of attacks occur from non-neutered males, and over 50% are from chained dogs (while still chained).

    So I’d absolutely support a licensing regime for breeders; with a ban on non-breeders having non-neutered males – calls for anything else are cr*p until that is sorted.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. iiq374 (262 comments) says:

    tvb – unfortunately your reasoning forgets the last time that we had this kind of backlash was after a Jack Russell severely bit the face of a toddler who poked their head through a fence. ALL dogs regardless of size CAN cause significant harm.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. DavidC (179 comments) says:

    Council takes $87 a year off me to register my neutered pure bred German Short haired pointer. It would be $137 but they “discount” if you neuter and fence your yard no reason at all why the undiscounted cost couldn’t be higher as a deterrent.

    Pig-dog type breeds (short stocky big head and jaws) that are bred as sporting dogs but kept in town and not exercised are always going to be timebombs.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Murray (8,835 comments) says:

    Can we put down dangerous breeds of human?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Piob (14 comments) says:

    The politicians will never tackle this properly. Every time there is a bad attack the dog lovers state that the owners should be registered, al la gun licensing, as it’s not the beautiful dogs fault, just bad owners. Everyone else says get rid of the bad breeds. Licensing owners is impractical. Killing or neutering dogs upsets dog lovers. Much too difficult for politicians to come up with something that works for both camps and we end up with an ineffectual solution. It’s hard to get away from the conclusion that the only real solution is to destroy or sterilise dogs, but it wont happen.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Viking2 (10,709 comments) says:

    Well Rodney campaigned forever to fix this but no one listened cause politics got in the way and now we have the usual rash of summer injuries. And that’s what it is, kids and dogs on holiday. Not even worth the space it takes up.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. iiq374 (262 comments) says:

    DavidC – please don’t get me started on the council.
    One thing the council is supposed to do with our overly expensive dog registration fees is to ensure adequate dog exercise areas including a review every 3 years.

    So go to:
    http://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/en/services/dogsandanimals/exercisingyourdog/pages/central.aspx
    and find “Fisher Park”.

    Don’t you think the council should have noticed that they sold Fisher Park to Coke in 2005 and there is a great thumping warehouse there now? The security guards certainly don’t take kindly to me trying to exercise my dog there.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. iiq374 (262 comments) says:

    neutering dogs upsets dog lovers
    Sorry Piob – don’t agree with that at all; most genuine dog lovers are in favour of neutering because it decreases the numbers of dogs needing to be put down / strays / etc. I think you’ll find a high proportion of dog abusers are the ones opposing compulsory neutering

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. iiq374 (262 comments) says:

    Murray – but that would set a highly dangerous precedent. Especially given the number of registered dogs is comparable to the number of a specific ethnicity ‘registered’ in our census. Yet the number of starship cases and child deaths due specifically to abuse from the human ethnicity is higher than the dogs (even though the latter includes the non-registered too…)

    So why don’t we have the no more than 2 kids without a license and compulsory micro-chipping in the human ethnicity? Interesting question…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Murray (8,835 comments) says:

    Well spotted iiq374. Except we’re not permitted to even see that problem.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. RRM (8,988 comments) says:

    My libertarian tendencies tend to take a back seat every time a large powerful dog tries to rip a child to bits.

    YET AGAIN the dogs’ owners are reported as being “shocked” by the “out of character” actions of their animal, which has “always been a good pet” and has “never done anything like this before.” You could write a script for it.

    Well – newsflash. Dogs have large heads & powerful jaws so they can kill things.

    If I have to have a license so that my fellow NZers know I’m competent to drive a car among them on the roads, then dog owners should have some sort of license so that I know they are competent to keep their dangerous animals from harming people.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. RRM (8,988 comments) says:

    iiq374 – great idea, their registration numbers could perhaps be tattooed on their arms?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Grant Michael McKenna (1,152 comments) says:

    If they tax dogs, they’ll tax people. Hone Toia, 1892.

    Arbitrary historical reference.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. kowtow (6,690 comments) says:

    No amount of law will overcome the lack of common sense in society. Kowtow 2012.

    Arbitrary contemporary reference.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Hollyfield (67 comments) says:

    Further to RRM’s comment at 12.55pm, it is quite likely that the dog has been displaying dominant behaviour for some time, and because each behaviour is not an issue within the household, the owners haven’t recognised it as problem behaviour. Many owners (all of my friends who also have dogs!) feed their dog first, so that the dog isn’t a nuisance while the people are eating. However, in packs the most dominant dog eats first, so by feeding your pet dog first you are telling your dog that he is the boss of you, as you eat second you are second-in-command – you even bring him food and present it to him as an offering! It is better for people to eat first, and only then allow the dog to eat – this tells the dog that you are the boss. Dogs may be domesticated, but they also have the instincts of a wild animal – in the same way that well-fed pet cats still hunt. Probably most dogs who display seemingly mild dominant behaviour don’t ever attack, but I don’t think it can be considered surprising when they do.

    From http://www.dogbreedinfo.com/articles/dominatebehaviorsdogs.htm

    Besides the obvious guarding, growling and biting many dogs display a variety of dominant behaviors that commonly go unrecognized by their humans. Dogs very rarely display the highest level of dominance overnight. There are usually signs leading up to it over the years and dominant alpha dogs do not always growl and bite. If the owners are giving the dog what they want there sometimes is no reason for the dog to growl or bite unless they are challenged. Dogs understand that they exist in a human world. After all, who gives them food and opens the door for them to go potty? When humans perform these tasks on demand from the dog though, why wouldn’t the dog think they’re the leader? It is easy for dogs to get the impression they are alpha in their pack. Since many canine alpha behaviors are not acceptable in human society, for example biting being one of the alpha communication tactics it is important for humans to remain the leaders over their dogs.

    Some examples of dominant dog behaviour: (there is a much longer list on the website, but these are the things I observe that some owners don’t seem to realise are dominant behaviour)
    Pushing a toy into you or pawing in order to get you to play with them.
    Nudging to be pet.
    Barking or whining at humans which many owners consider “talking” (without a command to do so).
    Jumping or putting their paws on humans (without a command to do so).
    Persistence about being on a particular piece of furniture when you ask them to stay off (dog owns it).
    Persistence about going in and out doorways before humans.
    Persistence about walking in front of humans while on a lead.
    Persistence about getting through the doorway first.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. annie (533 comments) says:

    @Hollyfield -

    That’s a hell of a lot of work!

    Easier to stick to cats, who seem to regard themselves as first equal with the humans in the household. The occasional problem cat needs to be told who is in charge, but it’s rare. And most of them have great personalities.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Griff (6,263 comments) says:

    Pit bull Staffy American bull terrier

    same old breeds same old story
    would not heart a fly
    its the owners
    poor doggy woggy

    kill the bloody things
    they are bred to dominate to the death other dogs.
    little wonder the odd kids gets bitten

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. iiq374 (262 comments) says:

    I would suggest everyone interested in dog control in New Zealand puts some pressure on the Dept of Internal Affairs to make the data in the National Dog Database (excluding identifiers of course) available to the public.

    At least go here http://www.data.govt.nz/datasetrequest/show/44 and vote.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. slijmbal (1,133 comments) says:

    As a child we were taught to be careful around german shepherds. The true breed had been bred for predominantly guard dog type purposes and as such was more easilly taught to attack humans and was of a size to be dangerous\threatening. However, the real point was the typical owner of these dogs bought the dog precisely because they had a reputation and the correlation between aggressive dogs and breed was really a correlation between owner type and breed I suggest. They typically deliberately enouraged bad behaviour in their dogs as a macho thing. Nowadays the bad owner gravitates to the pit bull or rottweiler like dogs.

    That aside I don’t ever remember hearing about attacks by packs of chihuahuas putting people in hospital for instance – breed type does matter.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. plebe (271 comments) says:

    As a rule of thumb,BAN maoris from owning dogs and having children,problem solved all around

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. iiq374 (262 comments) says:

    That aside I don’t ever remember hearing about attacks by packs of chihuahuas putting people in hospital for instance – breed type does matter.
    Jack Russell – but proves the point:
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10730320


    Five-year-old Rylee was attacked by her cousin’s foxy/jack russell-cross when the family was unwrapping presents at Rylee’s nana’s home in West Auckland.

    The bite narrowly missed her jugular and her mum says the little girl is scarred and terrified of small dogs.

    Problem is it’s generally so much easier to make a news story out of a “pit bull” attack than a “cute” dog attack.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Daigotsu (445 comments) says:

    “It is worth looking at whether certain breeds which are known to consistently attack people should be banned”

    I love the way you say that like it hasn’t been “looked” at about a thousand times, over and over.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. voice of reason (491 comments) says:

    “iiq374 (226) Says:
    January 24th, 2012 at 2:45 pm
    That aside I don’t ever remember hearing about attacks by packs of chihuahuas putting people in hospital for instance – breed type does matter.
    Jack Russell – but proves the point:”

    The only point if proves is that certian dog types are pre-disposed to attack – Jack Russels are a terrier.
    I cant ever recall seeing or hearing about an attack by a Cocker Spaniel.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. DavidC (179 comments) says:

    Hollyfield @1.43 Interesting that a few of the behaviours in your list have crept back into my dogs behaviour after a month at beach with kids pampering him.

    annie @ 2.05 I would be somewhat sceptical about taking my moggy into bush to have it point a deer for me.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. iiq374 (262 comments) says:

    Voice of Reason – suggest you read the below:
    http://bsl.bsl-sbt.com/breeds/ragesyndromeincockerspaniels.php?s=&l=

    Then refrain from making more idiotic comments

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. iiq374 (262 comments) says:

    PS for those not inclined to follow the link and read the full scientific discourse the below extract should suffice as a taster


    Aggression in 108 dog breeds and six crosses was ranked by 185 members of the Companion Animal Society of the New Zealand Veterinary Association.
    The Rottweiler and German Shepherd were categorised as extremely aggressive and the Akita, Basengi, Chihuahua (long-coated and short-coated), Chow Chow, Cocker Spaniel, Shar pei and Welsh Corgi (Cardigan and Pembroke) were classified as very aggressive.

    A chi-squared test of data from the twenty most popular breeds showed that significant differences were perceived between the breeds.
    Cocker Spaniels, Pembroke Welsh Corgis, German Shepherds and Rottweilers were more aggressive than Staffordshire Bull Terriers, Border Collies and Doberman Pinchers, which were more aggressive than Cavalier King Charles Spaniels, Bichon Frise, English Springer Spaniels, German Shorthaired Pointers, Weimaraners, Labrador Retrievers, Golden Retrievers, Newfoundlands, Dalmatians, Boxers, Bulldogs, Bull Mastiffs and Rough Collies

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. tristanb (1,133 comments) says:

    Pitbulls, and those other white trash/gang member breeds are nearly always responsible. They’re bred to fight and be aggressive. Trash own them to look tough and as a status symbol. These people also don’t train the dog, won’t neuter a dog, abuse and neglect dogs. So the dogs, already violent by nature, become more violent by nurture (or lack of it).

    The same people also: have multiple young children in overcrowded houses, have poor fencing, don’t train their kids, won’t neuter themselves, and don’t supervise their kids. They’re low in IQ, and use P/weed, so their reasoning “he’s normally really good around children, it’s the 3 year old’s fault for pulling its tail” makes perfect sense in their drug-fucked, shrunken frontal-lobed minds.

    It’s a recipe for disaster.

    Look at these creatures: http://www.pitbullvideo.org/?page_id=132
    I have seen owners that look like them. Small, thoughtless eyes, furrowed brow and wrinkly face from smoking and drug-related emaciation, tiny brain capacity, aggressive-looking jewellery, and over-muscled body.

    Ban pitbulls, ban staffordshires. Stop anyone on a benefit from owning a dog – why should I pay tax that’s going to go to dog food and spiky collars? Anyone with a criminal conviction should not be allowed to have a dog registered in their name. Doing these things would help.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. tristanb (1,133 comments) says:

    Pitbulls, and those other white trash/gang member breeds are nearly always responsible. They’re bred to fight and be aggressive. Trash own them to look tough and as a status symbol. These are people who don’t train the dog, won’t neuter a dog, and abuse and neglect dogs. So the dogs, already violent by nature, become more violent by nurture (or lack of it).

    The same people also: have multiple young children in overcrowded houses, have poor fencing, don’t train their kids, won’t neuter themselves, don’t supervise their kids, and have tons of cousins and friend’s young kids coming over (no surprises the woman with the pitbull happened to be pregnant). They’re low in IQ and use P/weed, so their reasoning “he’s normally really good around children, it’s the 3 year old’s fault for pulling its tail” makes perfect sense in their drug-fucked, shrunken frontal-lobed minds when a child’s face gets ripped off.

    It’s a recipe for disaster, and I’m actually surprised we don’t have more attacks.

    Look at these creatures: http://www.pitbullvideo.org/?page_id=132
    I have seen owners that look like them. Small, thoughtless eyes, furrowed brow and wrinkly face from smoking and drug-related emaciation, tiny brain capacity, aggressive-looking jewellery, and over-muscled body for an animal that spends most of its time in the same place.

    Ban pitbulls, ban staffordshires. Stop anyone on a benefit from owning a dog – why should I pay tax that’s going to go to dog food and spiky collars? And anyone with a criminal conviction should not be allowed to have a dog registered at their address. Doing these things would help.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. tristanb (1,133 comments) says:

    Pitbulls, and those other white trash/gang member breeds are nearly always responsible. They’re bred to fight and be aggressive. Trash own them to look tough and as a status symbol. These are people who don’t train the dog, won’t neuter a dog, and abuse and neglect dogs. So the dogs, already violent by nature, become more violent by nurture (or lack of it).

    The same people also: have multiple young children in overcrowded houses, have poor fencing, don’t train their kids, won’t neuter themselves, don’t supervise their kids, and have tons of cousins and friend’s young kids coming over (no surprises the woman with the pitbull happened to be pregnant). They’re low in IQ and use P/weed, so their reasoning “he’s normally really good around children, it’s the 3 year old’s fault for pulling its tail” makes perfect sense in their drug-fucked, shrunken frontal-lobed minds when a child’s face gets ripped off.

    It’s a recipe for disaster, and I’m actually surprised we don’t have more attacks.

    Look at these creatures: http://www.pitbullvideo.org/?page_id=132
    I have seen owners that look like them. Small, thoughtless eyes, furrowed brow and wrinkly face from smoking and drug-related emaciation, tiny brain capacity, aggressive-looking jewellery, and over-muscled body for an animal that spends most of its time in the same place.

    Ban pitbulls, ban staffordshires. Stop anyone on a benefit from owning a dog – why should I pay tax that’s going to go to dog food and spiky collars? And anyone with a criminal conviction should not be allowed to have a dog registered at their address. Doing these things would be a good start.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. beautox (406 comments) says:

    Hollyfield is right – it’s all about dominance and who is the pack leader.

    Although the same old script, as described by RRM, is often played out:

    >> owners are reported as being “shocked” by the “out of character” actions of their animal, which has “always been a good pet” and has “never done anything like this before.”

    However, I would wager that very few dogs (and owners) that have been through obedience training are attacking.

    Obedience training is as much about training an owner to be the pack leader, as it is about training a dog to be submissive. It’s actually quite normal for dogs to be submissive, as in a pack there is only one leader, so the chances are that any particular dog will not be the leader, especially when young.

    The problem is all down to owners rewarding, either accidentally or on purpose, dominant dog behaviour.

    I speak as someone who in the past had no idea about how dogs work, but still owned them. Fortunately now I do know how they work. It’s not rocket science.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. voice of reason (491 comments) says:

    “iiq374 (228) Says:
    January 24th, 2012 at 3:20 pm
    Voice of Reason – suggest you read the below:
    http://bsl.bsl-sbt.com/breeds/ragesyndromeincockerspaniels.php?s=&l=
    Then refrain from making more idiotic comments”

    Awfully defensive there iiq374
    My point being that there is no suprise that a foxy or jack russell would bite someone as they are terriers.
    On the other hand Cocker Spaniels being a Gun dog have soft jaw and a natural tendency to carry rather than bite as I presume you would know

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. voice of reason (491 comments) says:

    http://www.massey.ac.nz/massey/about-massey/news/article.cfm?mnarticle_uuid=80688DB1-96BF-57FE-A224-10860C6827E3

    “Don’t fear the spaniel, says animal behaviour expert

    Professor Kevin Stafford
    New Zealanders need not live in fear of being attacked on the street by aggressive cocker spaniels, says animal behaviour specialist Professor Kevin Stafford…….

    The study found cocker spaniels, rottweilers, boxers, Yorkshire terriers and German shepherds were the most prevalent breeds in incidents of dog aggression. But Professor Stafford says the Spanish study is not relevant to New Zealand.
    “Our research into dog bites found that about a fifth were by mixed breed dogs, 15 per cent by German shepherds and 11 per cent by Jack Russells. …”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. Fletch (5,719 comments) says:

    Sadly, those in favour of banning certain breeds are twenty years too late. The SPCA called for such bans as far back as 1990, particularly for the American Pit-bull.

    Correct. I remember that people from overseas almost begged us not to let them in because of the problems over there, but no – as per usual, we in NZ think we know better and have to try it ourselves.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. iiq374 (262 comments) says:

    Oh yes – A professor who uses the specific phrase below just fills with confidence in their conclusions:
    But generally international research suggests that it is the most common breeds that do most of the biting.

    However you were the one saying that they never attacked – I was pointing out that it was specifically false; and in fact the specific breed you mentioned is known for having a condition that can lead to “attack will happen without apparent cause”.
    (http://www.amazon.com/English-Springer-Spaniels-Barrons-Complete/dp/0812017781)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. voice of reason (491 comments) says:

    iiiq374 – I didnt say they “NEVER” attacked at all – I wrote I cant ever recall seeing or hearing about an attack by a Cocker Spaniel. So far you haven’t found a specific case you can point me to.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. voice of reason (491 comments) says:

    In any case my original point was that some types of dog were more inclined to bite than others – eg Terriers vs Spaniels. I think I have at least supported that opinion with the article linked above

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. nasska (9,501 comments) says:

    voice of reason

    I go along with most of what you have written especially that about terriers. I’ve owned dogs for most of my life & I wouldn’t have ANY terrier or terrier cross on the property for punishment. They are comparatively hard to train & many are unpredictable.

    One point I do take issue on is the figures giving percentages of attacks against various breeds. At a rough estimate there would be twenty German Shepherds & fifty Labradors for every Cocker Spaniel. All dogs can bite but most can be trained not to. I reckon you could predict the likelihood of a dog becoming a problem by watching how they are treated as a puppy. Most people get a little bundle of fluff & let it get away with murder right at the time it should be learning who’s boss.

    An eight week old pup has a mind like a sponge & it’s not too early to discourage it from nipping. Never belt the pup….just hold its mouth closed with one hand & voice your disapproval if they try. Do that for fifteen seconds or so every nip & a week or so later you’ve won that battle. Once you’ve got the upper hand everything else will be relatively easy.

    Here endith the lesson.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. side show bob (3,660 comments) says:

    A fair while ago we were having a problem with some rather anti social dogs on our road. The dogs use to come tearing out of certain driveways and try to rip the retreads off passing cars. Some of these aholes had taken to chasing children on their bikes, biking up to the top of the road to catch the school bus. At the time I reloaded my own shotgun ammo as it was much cheaper then buying new. A mate and myself decided to make a special run of rock salt and wheat cartridges. Oh what joy, got my mate to drive the ute with myself and my old Browning semi on the back. Commenced to touring down the road, of course the usual suspects would fly out and savage anything that went pass their patch. Naive fools would fly down the road in front of ute, bang bang, such fun to see them tumbling down the road as their back legs caved in. Yes there were some seriously suffering dogs that day but the surprise surprise they must have found God as they never annoyed another soul on our road.. They just needed to be put in their place, it’s a lesson long since forgotten in this country.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. big bruv (12,348 comments) says:

    In the 70′s it was the German Sheppard
    In the 80′s it was the Doberman
    In the 90′s it was the Rottweiler
    In the 00′s it was the Pit Pull

    When are we going to start blaming the owners?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. EverlastingFire (290 comments) says:

    Need testing against the owners. Too many scum bags treating their dogs like shit, thus making them violent.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. Johnboy (13,386 comments) says:

    “The dog’s owner, who did not want to be named, said his partner was walking the 2-year-old dog, “”RILEY”", on a lead about 2.30pm on Te Ngae Rd near Puketawhero Park in Rotorua.”

    The fecking dog was an Oirish bastard! No surprise it was mad!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Viking2 (10,709 comments) says:

    http://screencast.com/t/xD7CvZwVlac

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. Megatron (184 comments) says:

    Don’t shoot the dogs, shoot the fucking owners, 9 times out of 10 it’s the usual suspects, kids with stupid first names, would not know their father is, scabby low life with a propensity to rape kiddies, steal shit and generally embarrass the rest of the country.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. Salacious Crumb (28 comments) says:

    Thank god we had the compuslory micro chipping law passed. Working well I see.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. iiq374 (262 comments) says:

    Voice of Reason –

    http://www.ashburtonguardian.co.nz/news/todays-news/6386-editorial-comment-january-20-2012.html
    Spanish research between 1998 and 2006 showed that the docile, floppy-eared cocker spaniel is the dog breed most often involved in attacks around the world.

    But yes – part of the issue with media reporting is the perception they tend to build up around breeds – primarily by only reporting the breed when it is the current day ‘bad boy’. Used to be Dobermans, then Rotties, currently “Pitbull” (covering all the ‘pitbull’ breeds including staffies)

    I still want to know if the NZ experience is the same as internationally that over 80% of attacks are perpetrated by non-neutered males. If that’s the case it makes any BS around breed insignificant don’t you agree?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. abFriends for the love of Animals (1 comment) says:

    I was born in Switzerland. And I was raised in a family that enjoyed all aspects of dogs. My father had a great passion for dogs and spend all his free time as a” Search and Rescue dog instructor” he has successfully trained more than 1,000 dogs, and their owners, for search and rescue in the mountain and for the Swiss Army;
    Our pet’s are not”just animals”.They are our best friends, our companions for life:

    When we arrived in Zealand we was shocked! How Dogs, animals are being treated on a daily basis. Dogs locked in this small metal cage cages 24/7. Or Dogs who are forced to live outdoors their lives at the end on heavy chains in all weather extremes. Even our local ..SPCA Kerikeri.. in Bay Of Islands sets poor example?? If you treat a Dog this way in Switzerland ,,THIS DOG OWNER WOULD BE ALL IN JAIL,, The cruelty and abuse that some Kiwi’s pay to animals, completely innocent and unable to defend themselves is truly disgusting.

    The Facts; Chaining “increases the likelihood of a dangerous defensive response to a perceived encroachment on the dog’s territory or possessions (food or water bowls). As a child approaches a chained dog, the dog gives a warning sign… such as a growl or a stiffened posture…that the child does not recognize. On the issue of safety, our records indicated that 83 percent of dog bites in NZ were from Owned family dogs[who] were confined on chains or had been chained and had broken loose.

    Most important “give NZ People more education, knowledge!! And biggest priority spay and neuter “all dog and cats” in New Zealand. Many shouldn’t have had a dog, and didn’t have a clue about how to raise a puppy. And to many of this so ,,call dysfunctional families,, or gang members have a Dog and Children!

    This is the reason you have so many aggressive Dog Attack in NZ. Maybe you should have tests for becoming a parent. But after fifteen years living in Nz we see the real truths about Kiwi’s: There is a strong link between cruelty to animals and violent crime against children! It seems the same people just commit the same abuse over and over again! You kiwi’s have a shocking reputation overseas,the way you treat your children and animals.How New Zealand treat Animals and children its a reflection our culture and society.
    “New Zealand is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing.” – Bob Winter
    Friends for the love of Animals

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.