Rant - Idiot dog owners

TooManyDogs

Why is it that dog owners think it's hilarious that their single, badly socialised dog tries to take on my pack of dogs?!?!?! Just back from a walk on the beach and have encountered such a prize of humanity. The tide is full in which means that there's very little beach left, I had seen her in the distance in the car park letting her dog out of the car and then get back in the car herself!! She left him outside for about 10 mins and I avoided that bit of the beach, then she obviously decided he wasn't going to walk himself and got out of the car and down the beach, I headed to the other bit of limited sand thinking I could have 1 half and her the other cos very few people like my dogs too near theirs (totally understand, 6 dogs can look intimidating so I give people tons of space). But she headed straight for me, with her off lead dog giving it loads to each of my dogs he passed, and she comes straight up to me for a chat! Her little bugger is darting around barking into each of my dogs' faces and she's saying "would you look at him, he thinks he's so brave" and laughing!!!!! She made absolutely no effort to call him back or correct him, I told her he was going to get himself into trouble acting like that with the wrong dog and she justified it by saying he's never seen so many dogs at once before!! I tried moving away but she kept following me and finally I told her he wouldn't be so brave if mine got pissed off and turned on him as a group (now they wouldn't be let but days like today I'd be tempted :rolleyes: ) Still very little reaction so in the end I had to leave and go home.

VERY effing annoying

PS on a different note, does anyone have those dry dog bags, that you zip your dog into when they're wet and muddy and they dry off inside quickly? Thinking I need one cos Wiley is not massively impressed being tied into a towel with only her head sticking out

BillyMitchel

Totally agree, I was wanting to post something similar. I've a 75lb 8 month old Dogo Argentino and it's really starting to pee me off. People just don't have full control of their dogs, especially tiny little yappy ones. Every single day with out fail there is always an out of control dog running up and barking and basically having no dog manners what so ever. My fella is a big baby and only reacts when challenged but once that happens he's a different dog and its only a matter of time before a dog gets hurt and I'm probably going to be the one that gets blamed because of his size. I've a fairly good understanding of doggy body language and behavior so i know before hand if something will happen and when I say it to the owners they looks at me like I was some sort of idiot and then of course the dogs are barking and they are looking at me as if to say why is your dog doing that! Complete morons!

The park rules even says all dogs should be kept on a lead (mine is) and all the park workers drive around doing or saying nothing. Whats happening more and more is kids walking around and not having any control of dogs. Over the week end there was a girl no older than 12/13 who had a fully grown Husky barking like mad trying to get to mine and if I didn't notice from a distance and turn and go the other way pretty quickly I would of had a hysterical kid and hurt dogs.

I feel your pain OP I really do!

ShaShaBear

Agreed, and I hate it even more so because my dog is very aggressive with other dogs. I've had him approached and attacked so many times that the only safe place for me to walk him is actually in the street. I go absolutely out of my way to avoid other dogs, even one on leads, to keep Shadow as stress free as possible. People seem to take " Excuse me, my dog WILL defend himself if you do not control your dog" as some sort of personal challenge.
Keeping in mind that Shadow developed his aggression from being attacked by off-lead dogs in the park and estate where I lived when he was younger. Its a horrid cycle.

gregers85

Ye things like this happen me all the time! I have 2 German Shepherds (and recently added a springer spaniel)! My 2 are very well trained and very well socialized! i regularly go to obedience and agility classes with them so they are very used to other dogs and people so rarely even give other dogs a second glance while on the lead when out for walks! I am very aware of the stigma a lot of people have for "restricted breeds" so rarely leave mine off lead unless it is very secluded! I constantly meet people who let there dogs go crazy pulling at mine barking and growling and dont try move them out of the way or people who have there dogs off lead and there dogs run right up into mine!! I have no fear of dogs and often have to used my leg as a divide to keep the strange dog away! what amazes me is how many people find it amusing/ funny and smile/ laugh or crack a joke! when people react like this now I generally respond by saying "if my 2 where acting like that would you still be laughing??" it usually wipes the smile off haha

fatmammycat

Same with me gregers85, have a large gsd; at 11 months he's still only a pup but well socalised and pretty easy going, but the amount of small dogs that charge up to him barking and carrying on is ridiculous. Had to actually tell a woman to control her dog recently. Turns out her dog is dog aggressive, but unleashed for some reason. She was laughing and saying 'oh your guy could have him for breakfast!' and I said, 'That's great, I don't actually want my dog reacting in a negative way to your dog.' It was beyond stupid. In the end it took her 10 minutes to catch her dog and carry it away (my dog was on his lead).
Very frustrating, because that kind of encounter can set my training back a little, and it's annoying. I like that my lad has learned how to approach dogs in a calm manner ( he was a holy terror for bounding before -scary and impolite), sniff, wag and off we go: snarling lap dogs who could easliy be hurt need to be on leads JUST as much as any other dog aggressive dog, more so even.

Doom

OK, I totally understand your frustration with this person, but what about you having six dogs....if they did attack this dog, could you control them all, I doubt it.... I think you are a bit of idiot having six dogs out at once too.
Think of it this way, if it did go wrong and you both ended up in court, I think you both would be equally guilty, her for not been in control of her dog in a public place and you for thinking you can manage six dogs by yourself, or 'pack of dogs' in your own words.

ShaShaBear

Doom wrote: »

OK, I totally understand your frustration with this person, but what about you having six dogs....if they did attack this dog, could you control them all, I doubt it.... I think you are a bit of idiot having six dogs out at once too.
Think of it this way, if it did go wrong and you both ended up in court, I think you both would be equally guilty, her for not been in control of her dog in a public place and you for thinking you can manage six dogs by yourself, or 'pack of dogs' in your own words.

That is a simply ridiculous statement.

Doom

ShaShaBear wrote: »

That is a simply ridiculous statement.

Would you like to back your statement up.....I really would like to hear it.

Rommie

Doom wrote: »

OK, I totally understand your frustration with this person, but what about you having six dogs....if they did attack this dog, could you control them all, I doubt it.... I think you are a bit of idiot having six dogs out at once too.
Think of it this way, if it did go wrong and you both ended up in court, I think you both would be equally guilty, her for not been in control of her dog in a public place and you for thinking you can manage six dogs by yourself, or 'pack of dogs' in your own words.

First of all, you are being extremely offensive calling the OP an idiot for going out with six dogs. Second of all, plenty of people can do pack walks without a single issue, they have trained their dogs for one thing. Unlike the other person who's dog clearly had no training. I don't doubt for a second that the OP had control over the dogs, as the OP stated their dogs did nothing while an annoying dog was barking into their faces. Sounds like they had complete control to me

ShaShaBear

Doom wrote: »

Would you like to back your statement up.....I really would like to hear it.

It is perfectly within the OPs rights to walk all of her dogs at once if they feel the need to (expecting them to walk them all separately is utterly absurd :rolleyes: )
Dogs need to be under effective control. The other dog clearly was not under effective control, and since OPs dogs did no harm, they were under effective control.

One dog on a lead could just as easily break away from their owner on a lead if they were provoked enough. I know my collie-bernese cross would have no problem dragging me through mid air if he ran fast and hard enough. But since he is trained not to pull on the lead, I don't have to worry about it, except in circumstances where he is approached by an unattended dog, whose owner is either not present or breaking the law by not controlling their dog. I am just as likely to have no control over six of my Shadow as I am of one of him, and I know I certainly wouldn't stop walking my dog simply because he might try to defend himself from a dog whose owner is blatently breaking the law.

Doom

Use Google you will find plenty of 'my dog never done that before' stories...welcome to the real world....:rolleyes:

borderlinemeath

There's one particular dog on my local beach that is always off lead, always comes bolting up to me with my dogs and gets in my females face immediately. Coco is great with other dogs, except when a dog completely invades her space and doesn't act politely and this dos is always the same, bounds over, no manners, doesn't take my girls body language into account and is all over her.

It's always the same, the owner comes over and apologises and says that he only wants to play but he never seems to act on it, or bother even leashing him when he sees us coming.

johnny-grunge

I agree with the OP. A person out walking six dogs could not do so if they weren't in control of the animals. The other person he bumped into sounds like a complete donkey.

Rommie

I'll have to give out to my housemate then for regularly walking four akitas and a bernese together. People's lives are in danger apparently!

ShaShaBear

Doom wrote: »

Use Google you will find plenty of 'my dog never done that before' stories...welcome to the real world....:rolleyes:

Exactly. "My dog"... not "my six dogs"

Are you suggesting no one walk their dog in case they cannot control them when the need arises?

Doom

It would seem the law appears to think that having 5 dogs or more requires a person to register with the local authority......are you a responsible person?

"more than 5 dogs aged over 4 months at any premises unless the premises are registered under regulations"

Doom

ShaShaBear wrote: »

Exactly. "My dog"... not "my six dogs"

Are you suggesting no one walk their dog in case they cannot control them when the need arises?

I think you will find the law is clear on that....

Control of Dogs Act, 1986

22.—(1) Where—

(a) on a complaint being made to the District Court by any interested person that a dog is dangerous and not kept under proper control, or

(b) on the conviction of any person for an offence under section 9 (2) of this Act,

it appears to the Court that the dog is dangerous and not kept under proper control, the Court may, in addition to any other penalty which it may impose, order that the dog be kept under proper control or be destroyed.

(2) Whenever the Court orders the destruction of a dog pursuant to subsection (1) of this section, the Court may—

(a) direct that the dog be delivered to a dog warden or any suitable person to be destroyed, and

(b) direct that the expenses of the destruction of the dog be paid by the owner of the dog.

(3) Whenever a dog is delivered to a dog warden or any other person pursuant to an order of the Court to be destroyed, the person to whom the dog is delivered shall, as soon as possible, destroy the dog, or cause it to be destroyed, in a humane manner.

(4) Any sums payable by the owner of a dog pursuant to a direction of the Court under subsection (2) (b) of this section may be recovered by a local authority as a simple contract debt in any court of competent jurisdiction.

(5) Where a dog is proved to have caused damage in an attack on any person, or to have injured livestock, it may be dealt with under this section as a dangerous dog which has not been kept under proper control.

ShaShaBear

Doom wrote: »

It would seem the law appears to think that having 5 dogs or more requires a person to register with the local authority......are you a responsible person?

"more than 5 dogs aged over 4 months at any premises unless the premises are registered under regulations"

Since you are quoting a regulation put in place for people who own a premises that keeps guard dogs, I'm going to leave it at that

Rommie

Doom wrote: »

It would seem the law appears to think that having 5 dogs or more requires a person to register with the local authority......are you a responsible person?

"more than 5 dogs aged over 4 months at any premises unless the premises are registered under regulations"

Where did I say that all the dogs belonged to my housemate exactly? I said she walked them all together

Rommie

The law applies to dogs not under control, which as previously stated the OPs dogs are. I really don't get why you're trolling this thread?

ShaShaBear

Rommie wrote: »

Where did I say that all the dogs belonged to my housemate exactly? I said she walked them all together

Think he's referring to the OP, but the regulation is meant for people who keep guard dogs, and geared towards commercial or business premises
Im sure the OP has dog licences for them all, if they all belong to the OP, in which case the Local Authority is aware

If it came to court, the owner of the unrestrained dog wouldn't have a leg to stand on, because all six dogs were on leads, which is what the Local Authority consider to be effective control. Not that any owner would bring it to court when they risk getting pulled on breaking dog control laws themselves

Doom

ShaShaBear wrote: »

Think he's referring to the OP, but the regulation is meant for people who keep guard dogs, and geared towards commercial or business premises
Im sure the OP has dog licences for them all, if they all belong to the OP, in which case the Local Authority is aware

If it came to court, the owner of the unrestrained dog wouldn't have a leg to stand on, because all six dogs were on leads, which is what the Local Authority consider to be effective control. Not that any owner would bring it to court when they risk getting pulled on breaking dog control laws themselves

19.—(1) The Minister may, by regulations, specify standards for premises in which more than five dogs aged over four months are kept and may make provision for the use and control of dogs

Doom

ShaShaBear wrote: »

Think he's referring to the OP, but the regulation is meant for people who keep guard dogs, and geared towards commercial or business premises
Im sure the OP has dog licences for them all, if they all belong to the OP, in which case the Local Authority is aware

If it came to court, the owner of the unrestrained dog wouldn't have a leg to stand on, because all six dogs were on leads, which is what the Local Authority consider to be effective control. Not that any owner would bring it to court when they risk getting pulled on breaking dog control laws themselves

On leads does not mean 'under control'

Btw...I'm not trolling, I am the only one here backing up my side with facts and laws.

Valentina

I absolutely hate this. As a dog owner I always keep mine on the lead and under control and will always give other dog walkers plenty of space to get past.

I have a horse and I like to take her to the beach which I am permitted to do so at certain times of the day/year. She doesn't mind dogs at all at home but snarling, yapping dogs running around her fetlocks can get her agitated. Dopey owners looking on and making no attempt to get their dogs under control will find same dogs being on the receiving end of a swift kick from my mare. :mad:

borderlinemeath

Doom wrote: »

ShaShaBear wrote: »

Think he's referring to the OP, but the regulation is meant for people who keep guard dogs, and geared towards commercial or business premises
Im sure the OP has dog licences for them all, if they all belong to the OP, in which case the Local Authority is aware

If it came to court, the owner of the unrestrained dog wouldn't have a leg to stand on, because all six dogs were on leads, which is what the Local Authority consider to be effective control. Not that any owner would bring it to court when they risk getting pulled on breaking dog control laws themselves

19.—(1) The Minister may, by regulations, specify standards for premises in which more than five dogs aged over four months are kept and may make provision for the use and control of dogs

What local authority deem that a dog must be on a lead? And by the way it's
'effectual control' not effective. If you're going to go spouting rubbish about laws, the least you can do is get it right:rolleyes:

tk123

Doom wrote: »

On leads does not mean 'under control'

Btw...I'm not trolling, I am only one here backing up my side with facts and laws.

?! What exactly are you supposed 'backing up'?! That the woman's dog was not under control or that TMD is meant to be automatically at fault for having 6 dogs?!

Doom

borderlinemeath wrote: »

Doom wrote: »

What local authority deem that a dog must be on a lead? And by the way it's
'effectual control' not effective. If you're going to go spouting rubbish about laws, the least you can do is get it right:rolleyes:

?? My quote at the bottom in bold is copied and pasted directly from the Act

ShaShaBear

borderlinemeath wrote: »

Doom wrote: »

What local authority deem that a dog must be on a lead? And by the way it's
'effectual control' not effective. If you're going to go spouting rubbish about laws, the least you can do is get it right:rolleyes:

No Borderlinemeath, I didn't say that they have to be on leads, I said that because they are on a lead, the Local Authority would consider them to be under effective control, whereas the dog who is not on a lead definitely wasn't under effective control when he annoyed the OPs dogs.
Dog laws quote as both Effective and Effectual. I mean that if all six of the OPs dogs were not on the lead as they were, then of course both owners would be at fault

DBB

Mod Note: Warning issued to Doom for using personal abuse against another user.
It is clear in the forum charter: attack the post, not the poster. Personal abuse will not be tolerated.
Do not reply to this post on-thread.
Thanks,
DBB

Doom

DBB wrote: »

Mod Note: Warning issued to Doom for using personal abuse against another user.
It is clear in the forum charter: attack the post, not the poster. Personal abuse will not be tolerated.
Do not reply to this post on-thread.
Thanks,
DBB

Fair enough, DBB, can I say <snip>

Mod note: no, you can't

borderlinemeath

Doom wrote: »

borderlinemeath wrote: »

?? My quote at the bottom in bold is copied and pasted directly from the Act

What does the Act of 1986 require of the owner of a dog in relation to keeping control over the same?
According to Section 9(1) unless a dog is in the premises of an owner or “such other person in charge” or in the
premises of a person where the consent of that person has been given, a dog shall not be in any other place unless
such owner or other persons in charge of the dog “accompanies it and keeps it under effectual control.”

ShaSha, it wasn't directed at you at all;)

DBB

Mod note: Doom red-carded for ignoring my instruction above.
Do not reply to this post on-thread,
Thanks,
DBB

Doom

Here....

Control of Dogs Act, 1986

22.—(1) Where—

(a) on a complaint being made to the District Court by any interested person that a dog is dangerous and not kept under proper control, or

(b) on the conviction of any person for an offence under section 9 (2) of this Act,

it appears to the Court that the dog is dangerous and not kept under proper control, the Court may, in addition to any other penalty which it may impose, order that the dog be kept under proper control or be destroyed.

ShaShaBear

borderlinemeath wrote: »

Doom wrote: »

What does the Act of 1986 require of the owner of a dog in relation to keeping control over the same?
According to Section 9(1) unless a dog is in the premises of an owner or “such other person in charge” or in the
premises of a person where the consent of that person has been given, a dog shall not be in any other place unless
such owner or other persons in charge of the dog “accompanies it and keeps it under effectual control.”

ShaSha, it wasn't directed at you at all;)

Was wondering there for a second, had to re-read my post

borderlinemeath

Doom wrote: »

Here....

Control of Dogs Act, 1986

22.—(1) Where—

(a) on a complaint being made to the District Court by any interested person that a dog is dangerous and not kept under proper control, or

(b) on the conviction of any person for an offence under section 9 (2) of this Act,

it appears to the Court that the dog is dangerous and not kept under proper control, the Court may, in addition to any other penalty which it may impose, order that the dog be kept under proper control or be destroyed.

The complaint has to be made, the court has to uphold the complaint and deem the dog dangerous for that to be a viable law. Otherwise any dog or 6 dogs in this case just have to be under effectual control. And nowhere does that state that that your average person out on the beach walking their dog(s) have to have them leashed unless there is a specific bye law in place (such as in Dunlaoire/Rathdown)

Doom

borderlinemeath wrote: »

The complaint has to be made, the court has to uphold the complaint and deem the dog dangerous for that to be a viable law. Otherwise any dog or 6 dogs in this case just have to be under effectual control. And nowhere does that state that that your average person out on the beach walking their dog(s) have to have them leashed unless there is a specific bye law in place (such as in Dunlaoire/Rathdown)

That's fine, if I saw a woman with six leashed dogs and another woman with one unleashed dog and they all kicked off attacking each other, I would report both sides, one for not controlling her one dog and the other for not been able to keep six dogs under her control.....simple isn't it

No need for any bye-laws....

TooManyDogs

It just goes to show how thireads can go when you go out for a few hours :eek:

Doom wrote: »

but what about you having six dogs....if they did attack this dog, could you control them all, I doubt it.... I think you are a bit of idiot having six dogs out at once too.
.......... you for thinking you can manage six dogs by yourself, or 'pack of dogs' in your own words.

I'm not even sure where to begin with this one! I'm perfectly entitled to have 6 dogs if I want to, and legally I'm allowed have 6 dogs if I want to. So you can quote all the passages of the Dog Control act at me you want but having 6 dogs does not automatically make them dangerous.

As to having control over them if they wanted to attack another dog?? Yes I have control of them. On several occasions I've stopped them chasing wild animals in the fields, and on at least 2 occasions I've told them to drop and back off from the cat they had caught in my garden, and believe me when that was the last thing they wanted to do having their blood up from the chase and catching of the poor cat (cat was fine both times by the way). Where I walk my dogs is regularly used by the 3 local stable yards to exercise their horses and not once have I had an issue with my dogs and the horses. Not that I should have to justify to anyone the level of control I have over my dogs but anyway.

TooManyDogs

Doom wrote: »

That's fine, if I saw a woman with six leashed dogs and another woman with one unleashed dog and they all kicked off attacking each other, I would report both sides, one for not controlling her one dog and the other for not been able to keep six dogs under her control.....simple isn't it

No need for any bye-laws....

I love the way you're going straight for everyone attacking each other :rolleyes:

Doom

You would if they had gotten into a scrap...
As a matter of interest are you registered with your local authority, by law you should if you have more than 5 dogs, and of course a responsible owner.

borderlinemeath

TooManyDogs wrote: »

I love the way you're going straight for everyone attacking each other :rolleyes:

I think if you read his posts TMD, he would only report if a woman with an unleashed dog and a woman with 6 dogs on a leash attacked each other. Sure don't you know men can control dogs with their sheer strength....:rolleyes:

TooManyDogs

Doom wrote: »

As a matter of interest are you registered with your local authority, by law you should if you have more than 5 dogs, and of course a responsible owner.

My dogs aren't guard dogs so I don't have to register with my local authority

Doom

TooManyDogs wrote: »

My dogs aren't guard dogs so I don't have to register with my local authority

Yes you do, read back throughout the posts and of course the relevant act.

ShaShaBear

Doom wrote: »

Yes you do, read back throughout the posts and of course the relevant act.

The law is for people who keep a guard dog or five or more dogs on a premises. Not residence. They're not the same thing. You have to tell the local authorities if you are keeping dogs on your premises (business/commercial) but not if you have them in your residence (home/personal)

Doom

borderlinemeath wrote: »

I think if you read his posts TMD, he would only report if a woman with an unleashed dog and a woman with 6 dogs on a leash attacked each other. Sure don't you know men can control dogs with their sheer strength....:rolleyes:

Of course when you're losing a debate, stoop to trying the old sexist argument :rolleyes:

Good night everyone, I did enjoy this.....erm....ah.....debate...

TooManyDogs

Doom wrote: »

Yes you do, read back throughout the posts and of course the relevant act.

No you don't. And I have read the relevant act, it's specific about guard dogs

steveone

mite be a bit off topic but I walk my two dogs on the beach close to where I live, and sometimes in the local park, I normally walk them off lead in fact I rarely put leads on them, they're obedient on call- and I've noticed that other walkers do the same, the behaviour of all of the dogs off leash is completely different. they're more placid, even the pomeranian. the only time I got nervous was when a staffy appeared with its owner- off leash, i started to sweat but both dogs were great..usually when dogs appear on leashes the barking and pulling starts, and its the dogs on the leashes that do it..and not because my two are up in their faces either.. is it something to do with them feeling trapped on a leash?

borderlinemeath

Doom wrote: »

Yes you do, read back throughout the posts and of course the relevant act.

Would you ever read the act yourself? You're quoting one particular section to suit your argument without looking at the context.

That particular section deals with dogs on a premises ie used as a business, ie a kennels, breeders, trainers etc. That's why they need to be registered with the local authority, for business purposes, not for an owner who has more than five dogs for their own personal use.

borderlinemeath

Doom wrote: »

Of course when you're losing a debate, stoop to trying the old sexist argument :rolleyes:

Good night everyone, I did enjoy this.....erm....ah.....debate...

Your words, you said yourself you would report a woman.

Here's a little bit of knowledge for you to take away from tonight - dogs respond better to vocal commands from women. The higher pitch of a female voice compared to the lower tone of a mans gets a better response from a dog.

Bullseye1

borderlinemeath wrote: »

Your words, you said yourself you would report a woman.

Here's a little bit of knowledge for you to take away from tonight - dogs respond better to vocal commands from women. The higher pitch of a female voice compared to the lower tone of a mans gets a better response from a dog.

Haha this normally puts men into shock.:p

kylith

borderlinemeath wrote: »

Your words, you said yourself you would report a woman.

Here's a little bit of knowledge for you to take away from tonight - dogs respond better to vocal commands from women. The higher pitch of a female voice compared to the lower tone of a mans gets a better response from a dog.

Really? My pair certainly take more notice of me than of Mr. Kylith, but I always put that down to me using a Mammy Voice and him using a Best Friend voice.

borderlinemeath

kylith wrote: »

Really? My pair certainly take more notice of me than of Mr. Kylith, but I always put that down to me using a Mammy Voice and him using a Best Friend voice.

Yep, Alison Bush of Happier Hounds told me when I was on one of her courses. It's almost like the lower pitch is associated with a lower tone which dogs can associate with being in trouble. Using a high pitched voice will get your dog exited that something good could be happening.

When I'm calling my dogs when they're running off leash I don't shout, instead I make a high pitched 'whoohoo' noise that they respond to immediately. If I shout or yell they might think they're in trouble. (apart from it being completely unladylike ) If they can't hear me because of wind/distance I use the whistle instead.