Is it required to have a dog on a lead?

Wolfe Tone

You DO NOT have to have your dog on a lead, merely under control.

seamus

seaniefr wrote: »

from the above link:
Stray Dogs

Stray dogs are dogs that are in a public place and are not accompanied by the owner or a responsible person. Dogs that are not under proper control are also considered stray dogs.

That's correct Sean. However it does not state that a dog in a public place under proper control and being accompanied by an owner or responsible person are strays.

There is no legal requirement for dogs generally to be on a lead in a public place.

crotalus667

seaniefr wrote: »

instead of pontificating about please feel free to have a look at the following link:
http://www.citizensinformation.ie/categories/environment/animal-welfare-and-control/control_of_dogs/

That only applies to dogs in public once they are on private land they are not required to have a collar or ID

VERYinterested

seaniefr wrote: »

instead of pontificating about please feel free to have a look at the following link:
http://www.citizensinformation.ie/categories/environment/animal-welfare-and-control/control_of_dogs/

Instead of wasting everyone's time, read the link you have posted. 'Pontificating' :rolleyes:

sellerbarry

andreac wrote: »

Would you be bothered if it was a labrador,spaniel or collie? Doubt it, so why does it make a difference if its a rottie?

Look. Why do you think rottys etc are used for security/gaurd dogs instead of Spaniels? Because they look more menacing. I wouldn't mind, but the owner struts around like he owns the neighbourhood too. Think i'll mention it to him next time he walks by. I have a four year old boy who loves dogs, but i'm fc uk ed if i'm leaving him in the garden with a rotty walking by with it's owner 30 yards behind. (without a muzzle)

Btw, I have a shih tzu and it's always on the lead unless it's 6.30 in the morning in a park. Why should law be different for the big boys dogs?

andreac

sellerbarry wrote: »

Look. Why do you think rottys etc are used for security/gaurd dogs instead of Spaniels? Because they look more menacing. I wouldn't mind, but the owner struts around like he owns the neighbourhood too. Think i'll mention it to him next time he walks by. I have a four year old boy who loves dogs, but i'm fc uk ed if i'm leaving him in the garden with a rotty walking by with it's owner 30 yards behind. (without a muzzle)

Btw, I have a shih tzu and it's always on the lead unless it's 6.30 in the morning in a park. Why should law be different for the big boys dogs?

There is a law there for restricted breeds so yes hes breaking the law by not having the dogs on a lead.
Its just peoples attitudes to certain breeds that really get to me.

I dont agree with you that they look more menacing, rottweilers are beautiful looking dogs and how anyone can think they look scary and menacing is just pure ignorance.:mad:

adser53

I was only thinking that it's been a while since the good old fashioned devil dog debate raised its ugly head.
Bottom line is yes, his dogs should be on a keash. If his dogs were'nt restricted and running amok nobody would bother reporting him. As soon as its a rottie, gsd, akita or whatever, all of a sudden everyones an "expert" on the law

kylith

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

You DO NOT have to have your dog on a lead, merely under control.

Unless they're a restricted breed, which these are.

zeds alive

wolfpawnat wrote: »

OP, is he the type that salutes you, if so he may be outgoing and you can talk to him. Just say you are aware not all of these breeds are as evil as their rep, but you are not comfortable with 3 large dogs around you, irregardless of their breed. If he is a good person and good onwer he will understand. If he gives a scumbag response, report him!

Nah he's a total prick and not the approachable kind , so I would report him... I'm not worried if people think I'm a busybody.

sellerbarry

andreac wrote: »

There is a law there for restricted breeds so yes hes breaking the law by not having the dogs on a lead.
Its just peoples attitudes to certain breeds that really get to me.

I dont agree with you that they look more menacing, rottweilers are beautiful looking dogs and how anyone can think they look scary and menacing is just pure ignorance.:mad:

You don't agree that they look more menacing? It's funny how they are the dogs picked to be baddies in movies etc.
Brian Yuzna's upcoming Horror movie "Rottweiler".
The Omen
Rottweiller Dogs of Hell

Need i say any more?
No smoke without fire imo.

DBCyc

sellerbarry wrote: »

You don't agree that they look more menacing? It's funny how they are the dogs picked to be baddies in movies etc.
Brian Yuzna's upcoming Horror movie "Rottweiler".
The Omen
Rottweiller Dogs of Hell

Need i say any more?
No smoke without fire imo.

Dogs of Hell - ha! I love that film, but I didn't take it that seriously. Are you also afraid of young boys called Damien?

Aurum

TillyGirl wrote: »

Why? Would you say the same if it was a poodle and two labs?

I love large dogs, and I'd certainly have one if I had the space for one, but I can completely understand why someone would be tentative about approaching three large, unleashed dogs. People who may be wary of dogs would subconsciously look at three unleashed Westies and think yes, I'd have a chance of surviving if those dogs became aggressive, whereas with a pack Rotties and German Sheherds, you wouldn't stand much of a chance.

Also, though the breed often suffers unfairly from negative stereotyping, in the US Rottweilers were "listed as the second most likely breed of dog named in fatal human attacks, following Pit Bulls..." If they aren't owned by a responsible, conscientious owner they can become very aggressive and territorial, which is a scary combination in a dog this size. It really shouldn't be that much of an imposition on the owners of the dogs to keep his dogs on a lead until they reach a more open space suitable for exercising large dogs.

andreac

sellerbarry wrote: »

You don't agree that they look more menacing? It's funny how they are the dogs picked to be baddies in movies etc.
Brian Yuzna's upcoming Horror movie "Rottweiler".
The Omen
Rottweiller Dogs of Hell

Need i say any more?
No smoke without fire imo.

Ah ffs, are you serious?? Im not even going to lower myself to comment on such a ridiculous reply, pathetic!!!:mad:
Film = Not real life.

Wolfe Tone

They are lovely dogs actually.

adser53

sellerbarry wrote: »

You don't agree that they look more menacing? It's funny how they are the dogs picked to be baddies in movies etc.
Brian Yuzna's upcoming Horror movie "Rottweiler".
The Omen
Rottweiller Dogs of Hell

Need i say any more?
No smoke without fire imo.

Ah yes the famous laws of the movie.... All irish people have woeful accents, love a fight and a bit of fiddle-dee-dee music, all romans have british accents, hobbits aren't much use in a scrap, toys come alive when youre not looking and all italian plumbers love mushrooms and will jump on your noggin given half the chance.
There are also imaginary boards laws too...people who talk crap are full of it....oh no wait....that one could be true. No smell of BS without BS

sellerbarry

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

They are lovely dogs actually.

I agree they are lovely dogs. But they are not on the list for nothing. I am sure lots of thought went into putting them on it.

Shenshen

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

They are lovely dogs actually.

All dogs are lovely until they're not.
And yes, the bigger they are, the more they are physically capable of inflicting damage and pain.

andreac

sellerbarry wrote: »

I agree they are lovely dogs. But they are not on the list for nothing. I am sure lots of thought went into putting them on it.

What are they on the list for then if you seem to know so much about the whole thing??

Actually thats where you are wrong. No thought went into it at all as if it did then no dogs would be on such a ridiculous list.

People that know absol nothing about dogs or any of the breeds in question were the ones to make up this list.:mad:

andreac

Shenshen wrote: »

All dogs are lovely until they're not.
And yes, the bigger they are, the more they are physically capable of inflicting damage and pain.

Exact same can be said about several other breeds of dogs which are big and strong, some of which are far stronger and heavier than the listed ones, but they arent on the list:rolleyes:

Shenshen

andreac wrote: »

Exact same can be said about several other breeds of dogs which are big and strong, some of which are far stronger and heavier than the listed ones, but they arent on the list:rolleyes:

As I already said a few times, I don't know the list, and wouldn't recognise which breed a dog is and if that breeds on the list as well.

The reason I'm scared of dogs is because I was attacked by a large one when I was a kid, as was a friend of mine when she was a teenager.
So I'm scared of large dogs.
I wouldn't run screaming from a poodle, but I still would keep my distance.
If somebody walked 3 large, fierce-looking dogs in my area without leashes on them, I wouldn't wonder about what breed they are. I simply would not approach this person, and probably panic and wet myself if the dogs came after me.

I don't know why people seem to bloody paranoid that somebody might be scared of a dog because the dog is on a list. Sounds to me more like the dog made the list because people are scared of them, not the other way around!

seaniefr

Shenshen wrote: »

As I already said a few times, I don't know the list, and wouldn't recognise which breed a dog is and if that breeds on the list as well.

The reason I'm scared of dogs is because I was attacked by a large one when I was a kid, as was a friend of mine when she was a teenager.
So I'm scared of large dogs.
I wouldn't run screaming from a poodle, but I still would keep my distance.
If somebody walked 3 large, fierce-looking dogs in my area without leashes on them, I wouldn't wonder about what breed they are. I simply would not approach this person, and probably panic and wet myself if the dogs came after me.

I don't know why people seem to bloody paranoid that somebody might be scared of a dog because the dog is on a list. Sounds to me more like the dog made the list because people are scared of them, not the other way around!

i guess really it depends on the owner's treatment of the dog and the type of training (if any) the dog has had. I suppose you could report the owner to the dog warden? it would probably bring a heap of crap on you. One of my neighbours has a rottie who would frighten the crap out of you to look at her as she is behind a totally enclosed fence & wall at the front but she is like a pussycat with their 6 & 3 year old's and very defensive if anyone goes near the kids!

adser53

Sellerbarry if you knew as much as you seem to be claiming then you'd know that the RB list was assembled with no basis on any fact or statitistics. In fact its highly probable it was compiled by someone who watched those movies you mentioned because there were no studies or anything done and they basically copied the UK who rushed in laws after media pressure following a few high profile dog attack cases. How many Rhodesian ridgebacks, akitas, tosas etc do you even think were in Ireland when they brought in the law first?
Shenshen, I see were your coming from and unfortunatly youve unwittingly stumbled into an arguement about these breeds that we "restricted" breed owners are sick off. Every so often someone comes on here saying rotties, or any rb for that matter, are dangerous or some such tripe and we're just tired of defending our breeds from ignorant people that believe movies or the sun newspaper over actual experience with these dogs.

VERYinterested

It's a wonder St Bernards weren't added to the list, wasn't Cujo a St Bernard?

Wolfe Tone

Shenshen wrote: »

All dogs are lovely until they're not.
And yes, the bigger they are, the more they are physically capable of inflicting damage and pain.

I have a rather large golden retriever, stick that on the list too?

wolfpawnat

zeds alive wrote: »

Nah he's a total prick and not the approachable kind , so I would report him... I'm not worried if people think I'm a busybody.

Feck the busy body thing. They are restricted and you are not comfortable having them run around.

I know most RB are lovely, but as with ANY breed there are bad eggs! Films don't help. But Rottweilers, GSD and Dobermans do look intimadating to some. I, myself, think they are gorgeous, but I respect the opinions of others and I can see the POV.

And anyone who has a bad experience of dogs, does not want to see 3 of any large breeds!!!

That said, if those dogs are on the list why aren't Irish Wolfhounds and St. Bernards?

Answer, no scumbags have them!

Half the rep of those dogs these days are because of scumbags having them and training them to be bad animals!

Cherry Blossom

Aurum wrote: »

People who may be wary of dogs would subconsciously look at three unleashed Westies and think yes, I'd have a chance of surviving if those dogs became aggressive, whereas with a pack Rotties and German Sheherds, you wouldn't stand much of a chance.

<snip>

If they aren't owned by a responsible, conscientious owner they can become very aggressive and territorial, which is a scary combination in a dog this size. It really shouldn't be that much of an imposition on the owners of the dogs to keep his dogs on a lead until they reach a more open space suitable for exercising large dogs.

I'm a responsible, conscientious owner of a Westie. She's very well socialised (with all sorts of people, other dogs, horses and other pets) and gets on great with 4 kids here aged between 1 and 5. However she doesn't have much contact with the baby as he tries to poke her eyes and pull her hair and the other 3 have it drummed into them whats acceptable and what isn't. As for a strange child (or adult) with a fear of dogs running away from her I have no clue how she'd react and wouldn't be too keen on giving her the opportunity to find out :rolleyes:.

That's my dog, for the same situation with a less responsible, less conscientious owner of 3 perhaps not so well socialised Westies I wouldn't fancy the chances of the person running away much!!

Shenshen

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

I have a rather large golden retriever, stick that on the list too?

Bloody hell, is it really so incomprehensible that there might be people who are simply scared of big predators and don't really feel safe around animals that could kill them if they wanted to?

If I was talking about being scared of spiders, would you keep asking questions like "What about tarantulas? Or what about redbacks? Or what about harvest spiders?", and THAT is an irrational phobia.

andreac

Shenshen wrote: »

Bloody hell, is it really so incomprehensible that there might be people who are simply scared of big predators and don't really feel safe around animals that could kill them if they wanted to?

If I was talking about being scared of spiders, would you keep asking questions like "What about tarantulas? Or what about redbacks? Or what about harvest spiders?", and THAT is an irrational phobia.

No, whats irrational is singling out certain breeds of dogs when any dog is capable of inflicting damage.
Yes dogs can attack, but so can every other breed of dog that isnt on the list, so why should only certain ones be targetted and singled out? It doesnt make sense, esp when there are lots of other breeds which are bigger, stronger and more than capable of inflicting more damage than the ones on that list.

Shenshen

andreac wrote: »

No, whats irrational is singling out certain breeds of dogs when any dog is capable of inflicting damage.
Yes dogs can attack, but so can every other breed of dog that isnt on the list, so why should only certain ones be targetted and singled out? It doesnt make sense, esp when there are lots of other breeds which are bigger, stronger and more than capable of inflicting more damage than the ones on that list.

If it was up to me? Seriously?

I have to repeat again, I don't know what dogs are on the list, I wouldn't be able to tell the breed if I saw them anyway.
So can we please stop the questions of what about collies, or what about retriever-poodle mixes, or what about whatever other big breed you know that's not on the list?

I realise I made a mistake repeating the OP's words in my reply, rather than saying "3 big dogs", I've apologised for it, I couldn't care less about that list of yours.

Callanutd

andreac wrote: »

Ah ffs, are you serious?? Im not even going to lower myself to comment on such a ridiculous reply, pathetic!!!:mad:
Film = Not real life.

I am afraid you are the one being ridiculous now. No body said film = real life. You made the point that Rotties dont look intimidating. Your point was countered with the above saying that if that is the case then why are they consistantly used as menacing dogs in the movies? I agree with you that it is unfair to tar one breed with the one brush. But at the same time you must realise that these dogs are restricted as they have the potential to cause a lot of damage. A bad rottie is a lot more dangerous than a bad spaniel. That is just fact. These are big powerful dogs and some people find them intimidating and would be reluctant to approach them.