Looking for suggestions for walking my RBL dog off leash - Dublin

Karlitto

Hey folks,

I am doing some looking around at the moment online for this, but perhaps someone on the boards could help me out.

I have 2 Rottweiler's and live in Baldoyle.

Obviously with the Rottweiler being on the restricted breed list, I cannot let them off the leash in public....ever, but they still need exercise, while lead walks are find and all, they do need to stretch their legs every now and then.

So, I am currently looking for someone who has some land (most likely a farmer) who wouldn't mind me walking them on their property. I realize the chances are slim, but if I don't look, I would never know.

I have currently sent off a couple of emails to local people around my area who have large fields.

What I am asking is, does anyone know any private property that I can ask the owner of the property if it is ok to walk there?

hidinginthebush

There's that field beside the Coast that sometimes has lads on scramblers on it. It's hardly farming land, I reckon if people are allowed to fly around it on motorbikes, the owners wouldn't mind a dog or two occasionally.

FWIW unless your dogs are killers that will attack anything in sight I don't think it's the end of the world if you let them off the lead. I've known pitbulls and rottweilers that were nothing more than big teddies. I remember one time I was walking my dogs, and there was a local hardman also walking his rott around the pitches. He was getting pretty close to my pair, so as a precaution I called them back. The Rottweiler came bounding over to me instead and game me the licking of a lifetime. Great dogs!

Karlitto

Sorry, whats FWIW?

I know the park well, I will check it out tonight, handy, it is right across the road But was unsure if it is "public" or "private"

Yea, generally they are, and it is always the owner, never the dog, but people are ignorant, they are 8 months old and already the stigma, i.e. Person on street meets them, rubs them, they are loving it, asks what they are, I say Rottweiler, they say "Oh" and take a step back (yea, having tales throws people sometimes)

Awesome! Well, thanks for the advice, shall check it out tonight

Karlitto

Just to check, which area to you mean?

hidinginthebush

FWIW = For what it's worth.

I think both areas should be grand. The lower one has a high wall between it and the road, so could be handy, the dog's wouldn't be able to escape, though the bigger area is probably easier to get in to. To be honest, I've never been in either, but you should be able to find a way in handy enough. I've seen people walking dogs around there before.

Also, you could also try down the end of Portmarnock beach. If you take the turn just before the off licence and head down towards the old golf club, you can get on to the beach there. It's usually less busy than the other end of the beach, plus if you walk down the beach a good bit it's usually deserted.

Karlitto

hidinginthebush wrote: »

FWIW = For what it's worth.

I think both areas should be grand. The lower one has a high wall between it and the road, so could be handy, the dog's wouldn't be able to escape, though the bigger area is probably easier to get in to. To be honest, I've never been in either, but you should be able to find a way in handy enough. I've seen people walking dogs around there before.

Also, you could also try down the end of Portmarnock beach. If you take the turn just before the off licence and head down towards the old golf club, you can get on to the beach there. It's usually less busy than the other end of the beach, plus if you walk down the beach a good bit it's usually deserted.

Ah I know where you are talking about, just before the roundabout, I used to walk there years and years ago when it was the racecourse I live just opposite graingers pub so it is handy. Ah, sure I will check them both out.

I thought about Portmarnock beach, but the wardens are always up there and generally it is busy enough (with dog walkers mind you), I would be more inclined to try the Burrow beach, the place is empty these days, but I want to wait till the summer and I am teaching them to swim.

I will check out the places beside the coast and let ya know

tk123

The dunes in Dollymount? Just make sure the dog is on lead entering and leaving as I've heard stories of the warden catching people on the way out with the dogs.

Karlitto

Thanks,

But that's the thing, I am looking for somewhere specifically so I can let them off without worrying about wardens.

Private fields and the likes.

CBRLizzie

I used to walk my Rottie in my local park (beside DCU) off lead, she was such a sweetie I had several people tell me they used to be afraid of Rotties until they met her, she changed a lot of people's minds about the breed. I only ever met one woman (in DCU) who was in my face screaming at me that she should be muzzled (she was on the lead at the time). Considering yer one was so aggressive, I'm surprised the dog didn't go for her. I managed to resist the temptation to give my opinion on who should be muzzled

Brilliant dogs.

Karlitto

Indeed,

Well, I had my first out and out in my local spot in Howth, ironically called "The Doghouse",

I was up there with Kim, as I frequently am, and pretty much all of the customers and all of the staff love her, anyway she was chilling on the ground, on a lead with the lead around the table, some miserable b**** with nothing better to do comes up to where I was sitting, and here is what was said:

Woman: Shouldn't that dog have a muzzle on?
Me: Naw, she is grand.
Woman: I wasn't asking if she was grand, I was asking if she should have a muzzle on.
Me: Nope.
Woman: Yes she should, she is one of those dangerous dogs.
Me: .....*sigh*, how about F***ing off and minding your own business?
Woman: This is my business, this is a public place and she should have a muzzle on her, put one on her now or I am calling the Gard's.
Me: You fire away and call the Gard's sweety, but you are the one who is going to look like a pillock, this is private property, now as previously requested, f*** off and mind your own business, goodbye.

Meanwhile Kim was chewing on a piece of straw minding her own business.

I know my response was not the nicest, but I have a seriously short fuse when it comes to this particular topic.

All the regular's kids love when I bring her up, they all come over and play with her (and she loves it, little slut), and they all know to ask before they pet her and are becoming more educated as to how to treat dogs that they do and don't know. So I see no reason why some narrow-minded git can think she can get away with talking to someone like that.

Not to mention I know the owner The house used to be his dogs actual house before it was made into the café, so guess who's side he would be on if push came to shove

Andy-Pandy

Karlitto wrote: »

Indeed,

Well, I had my first out and out in my local spot in Howth, ironically called "The Doghouse",

I was up there with Kim, as I frequently am, and pretty much all of the customers and all of the staff love her, anyway she was chilling on the ground, on a lead with the lead around the table, some miserable b**** with nothing better to do comes up to where I was sitting, and here is what was said:

Woman: Shouldn't that dog have a muzzle on?
Me: Naw, she is grand.
Woman: I wasn't asking if she was grand, I was asking if she should have a muzzle on.
Me: Nope.
Woman: Yes she should, she is one of those dangerous dogs.
Me: .....*sigh*, how about F***ing off and minding your own business?
Woman: This is my business, this is a public place and she should have a muzzle on her, put one on her now or I am calling the Gard's.
Me: You fire away and call the Gard's sweety, but you are the one who is going to look like a pillock, this is private property, now as previously requested, f*** off and mind your own business, goodbye.

Meanwhile Kim was chewing on a piece of straw minding her own business.

I know my response was not the nicest, but I have a seriously short fuse when it comes to this particular topic.

All the regular's kids love when I bring her up, they all come over and play with her (and she loves it, little slut), and they all know to ask before they pet her and are becoming more educated as to how to treat dogs that they do and don't know. So I see no reason why some narrow-minded git can think she can get away with talking to someone like that.

Not to mention I know the owner The house used to be his dogs actual house before it was made into the café, so guess who's side he would be on if push came to shove

You sound charming. Your dog should be muzzled if it is going to be in contact with others. End of story.

Bullseye1

Andy-Pandy wrote: »

You sound charming. Your dog should be muzzled if it is going to be in contact with others. End of story.

The woman was talking through her rear end. There is no Dangerous Dogs list in Ireland. If the poster is on private land with consent he is not in a public place and therefore not required to have a muzzled on their dog.

Also if your dog is on your own land and it is possible they will come into contact with others they are not required to have a muzzle on either . So your statement is also in-factual.

DBB

Hmmm, I think people need to be careful about what public and private property actually means.
Yes, a field belonging to a farmer is private property.
Our homes are private property.
But any private properties to which the general public have access, including restaurants, privately-owned commercial premises, private parks or gardens that are open to the public, are considered legally to be "public".
If the owner of an RB dog has an incident with their unmuzzled dog in such a property, they'd have it all to do to plead the "private property" exemption.

borderlinemeath

Karlitto wrote: »

Indeed,

Well, I had my first out and out in my local spot in Howth, ironically called "The Doghouse",

I was up there with Kim, as I frequently am, and pretty much all of the customers and all of the staff love her, anyway she was chilling on the ground, on a lead with the lead around the table, some miserable b**** with nothing better to do comes up to where I was sitting, and here is what was said:

Woman: Shouldn't that dog have a muzzle on?
Me: Naw, she is grand.
Woman: I wasn't asking if she was grand, I was asking if she should have a muzzle on.
Me: Nope.
Woman: Yes she should, she is one of those dangerous dogs.
Me: .....*sigh*, how about F***ing off and minding your own business?
Woman: This is my business, this is a public place and she should have a muzzle on her, put one on her now or I am calling the Gard's.
Me: You fire away and call the Gard's sweety, but you are the one who is going to look like a pillock, this is private property, now as previously requested, f*** off and mind your own business, goodbye.

Meanwhile Kim was chewing on a piece of straw minding her own business.

I know my response was not the nicest, but I have a seriously short fuse when it comes to this particular topic.

All the regular's kids love when I bring her up, they all come over and play with her (and she loves it, little slut), and they all know to ask before they pet her and are becoming more educated as to how to treat dogs that they do and don't know. So I see no reason why some narrow-minded git can think she can get away with talking to someone like that.

Not to mention I know the owner The house used to be his dogs actual house before it was made into the café, so guess who's side he would be on if push came to shove

You're not doing yourself or your dog any favours with that attitude. The way to deal with altercations with members of the public is to be polite, nice and factual, and if you have to, kill them with kindness. Speaking as you did is just giving people like that ammunition to get you in trouble with the dog warden.

And if you're in a place that members of the public are also allowed in without 'asking permission' ie a cafe, then technically you are in a 'public place'.

Bullseye1

A cafe is definitely a public place. I wouldn't put the dog at risk in such places. Always keep a muzzle on your person for such locations.

Hopefully in the future this unfair and unjust law will be reversed.

Kukey

Just my opinion but I wouldn't be posting up here places to walk an RB dog off lead.
You never know who is reading posts on here ie dog wardens and that will be the end of any places to walk your dog freely

tk123

borderlinemeath wrote: »

You're not doing yourself or your dog any favours with that attitude. The way to deal with altercations with members of the public is to be polite, nice and factual, and if you have to, kill them with kindness. Speaking as you did is just giving people like that ammunition to get you in trouble with the dog warden.

And if you're in a place that members of the public are also allowed in without 'asking permission' ie a cafe, then technically you are in a 'public place'.

+1 Sorry but assuming you actually said all that OP you're pretty much coming across a the type of owner that has your dog requiring a muzzle in the first place.

Karlitto

Andy-Pandy wrote: »

You sound charming. Your dog should be muzzled if it is going to be in contact with others. End of story.

Wrong, end of story.

borderlinemeath wrote: »

You're not doing yourself or your dog any favours with that attitude. The way to deal with altercations with members of the public is to be polite, nice and factual, and if you have to, kill them with kindness. Speaking as you did is just giving people like that ammunition to get you in trouble with the dog warden.

And if you're in a place that members of the public are also allowed in without 'asking permission' ie a cafe, then technically you are in a 'public place'.

I am not too bothered what people think of me, as I said, almost all of the people there, including the kids (some even toddlers) had no problem with it, infact most of the parents (if not the kids themselves) came up to ask if their child could pet her. Just this one bint who had a problem. It was as of line 3 which set me off, she just jumped straight into bitch mode. I couldn't get in trouble with the dog warden.

Correct! But it is still private property, look, it is like this, if you park outside on the double yellow lines right outside (which is also private property) or if you got a fine for not having road tax, you do not have to pay them (and I know someone who challenged a fine they got) because it is private property. (for those who do not know, your car cannot be parked in public if it has no tax)

Bullseye1 wrote: »

A cafe is definitely a public place. I wouldn't put the dog at risk in such places. Always keep a muzzle on your person for such locations.

Hopefully in the future this unfair and unjust law will be reversed.

I dearly hope so too. That's the thing! I always have her muzzle on her, and when I am in the doghouse I take it off, same as poop bags and in fact a spray to spray whatever poop can't be picked up due to being stuck on the ground.

Kukey wrote: »

Just my opinion but I wouldn't be posting up here places to walk an RB dog off lead.
You never know who is reading posts on here ie dog wardens and that will be the end of any places to walk your dog freely

This is the thing, I am looking to see if there is any known place of someone who has a large amount of property like a farmer who doesn't mind people walking their dogs. This would mean it is private land, so I would not be breaking any rules.

tk123 wrote: »

+1 Sorry but assuming you actually said all that OP you're pretty much coming across a the type of owner that has your dog requiring a muzzle in the first place.

Why would you think that? I do have a muzzle on her when we are out. Because I stood up and spoke back to someone who had a chip on their shoulder you think my dog is aggressive? Ah come on.

dharma200

I totally sympathise with you op, I have three restricted breed dogs, which anyone with any modicum of sense knows is the stupidest law ever....

However, it is my duty to make sure my dogs are protected from idiots like that woman... That is the thing... If any of my dogs are going to come into contact with joe public, private land or not, I won't risk my own dogs safety. Thew Arden and the guards etc will not give a fiddlers f on the pedantics of ownership of a patch of land before seizing the dog. I muzzle my dogs at all times because of this, to keep my own dogs safe. Also let's say mrs bint had a little labrapoodle with her, off lead, on your own dog was attacked by said dog and bit it badly.... Do you think anyone is going to believe the big auld rotty over mrs dublin 1 and her designer dog? Unless you find that secluded private field with no joe public on it, kids or no kids, keep the dog muzzled, for its own sake, not anyone else's. It's our job to protect our dogs from idiotic people and idiotic laws who will quite happily seize your dog, put you through hell and back in court, and even if you get the dog back it will be so traumatised it won't be the same animal......
Good luck with finding private ground....

borderlinemeath

Karlitto wrote: »

I am not too bothered what people think of me, as I said, almost all of the people there, including the kids (some even toddlers) had no problem with it, infact most of the parents (if not the kids themselves) came up to ask if their child could pet her. Just this one bint who had a problem. It was as of line 3 which set me off, she just jumped straight into bitch mode. I couldn't get in trouble with the dog warden.

It only takes one person to ring the dog warden and make a complaint about an RB dog unmuzzled. Whether the other 50 people there don't have an issue is not the problem, the problem is the person who does take issue and you effed and blinded her out of it.

Correct! But it is still private property, look, it is like this, if you park outside on the double yellow lines right outside (which is also private property) or if you got a fine for not having road tax, you do not have to pay them (and I know someone who challenged a fine they got) because it is private property. (for those who do not know, your car cannot be parked in public if it has no tax)

Do you really want to take that risk? Would you fight it all the way? Bearing in mind your dog may have been impounded? The dog warden has a job to do, and whether we like it or not has to treat complaints seriously. The way you spoke to the person did you, or your dog no favours at all. As has been pointed out in previous threads, if you're nice and polite and have your muzzle with you and put it on until the busybody goes away, it is the easy life for everybody, dog included.

I dearly hope so too. That's the thing! I always have her muzzle on her, and when I am in the doghouse I take it off, same as poop bags and in fact a spray to spray whatever poop can't be picked up due to being stuck on the ground.

So why couldn't you take the mature, higher ground and just muzzle her until the nosy parker left?

This is the thing, I am looking to see if there is any known place of someone who has a large amount of property like a farmer who doesn't mind people walking their dogs. This would mean it is private land, so I would not be breaking any rules.



Why would you think that? I do have a muzzle on her when we are out. Because I stood up and spoke back to someone who had a chip on their shoulder you think my dog is aggressive? Ah come on.

Hold on, standing up and speaking back to somebody is not what you said. You posted that you told her to F*** Off. Twice. That is not standing up for what you believe in, that's being rude and obnoxious. And as TK pointed out, is the type of behaviour that gets RBs their reputation, with owners trying to be 'hard men'.

Me: .....*sigh*, how about F***ing off and minding your own business?
Woman: This is my business, this is a public place and she should have a muzzle on her, put one on her now or I am calling the Gard's.
Me: You fire away and call the Gard's sweety, but you are the one who is going to look like a pillock, this is private property, now as previously requested, f*** off and mind your own business, goodbye.

For somebody who wants to fight BSL, you sure go the wrong way about it.

Karlitto

dharma200 wrote: »

I totally sympathise with you op, I have three restricted breed dogs, which anyone with any modicum of sense knows is the stupidest law ever....

However, it is my duty to make sure my dogs are protected from idiots like that woman... That is the thing... If any of my dogs are going to come into contact with joe public, private land or not, I won't risk my own dogs safety. Thew Arden and the guards etc will not give a fiddlers f on the pedantics of ownership of a patch of land before seizing the dog. I muzzle my dogs at all times because of this, to keep my own dogs safe. Also let's say mrs bint had a little labrapoodle with her, off lead, on your own dog was attacked by said dog and bit it badly.... Do you think anyone is going to believe the big auld rotty over mrs dublin 1 and her designer dog? Unless you find that secluded private field with no joe public on it, kids or no kids, keep the dog muzzled, for its own sake, not anyone else's. It's our job to protect our dogs from idiotic people and idiotic laws who will quite happily seize your dog, put you through hell and back in court, and even if you get the dog back it will be so traumatised it won't be the same animal......
Good luck with finding private ground....

While I do agree with keeping them safe, I follow all of the laws, I am not going to let some idiot impose extra sanctions on me or my dog. As I said, she was sitting there chewing on a piece of straw under the table minding her own business. She is a completely docile girl and has not had any issues with any dogs or people, I should also mention that I am not the only person who brings their dog here, some of which are off lead (which is fine as they are well behaved), I just wouldn't let her off the lead because she is quite nosy and at the end of the day, people do eat food here. Also, I respect that some people might have a fear of dogs, and it wouldn't be too nice if they had a fear and she came over sniffing around.

Oh, and one more thing, this place has an inside and an outside, she does not go inside, ever. I keep her out at my usual seat whenever I bring her up.

Karlitto

borderlinemeath wrote: »

It only takes one person to ring the dog warden and make a complaint about an RB dog unmuzzled. Whether the other 50 people there don't have an issue is not the problem, the problem is the person who does take issue and you effed and blinded her out of it.

Do you really want to take that risk? Would you fight it all the way? Bearing in mind your dog may have been impounded? The dog warden has a job to do, and whether we like it or not has to treat complaints seriously. The way you spoke to the person did you, or your dog no favours at all. As has been pointed out in previous threads, if you're nice and polite and have your muzzle with you and put it on until the busybody goes away, it is the easy life for everybody, dog included.

So why couldn't you take the mature, higher ground and just muzzle her until the nosy parker left?

Hold on, standing up and speaking back to somebody is not what you said. You posted that you told her to F*** Off. Twice. That is not standing up for what you believe in, that's being rude and obnoxious. And as TK pointed out, is the type of behaviour that gets RBs their reputation, with owners trying to be 'hard men'.

For somebody who wants to fight BSL, you sure go the wrong way about it.

Hang on a sec, from the moment she said "I wasn't asking if she was grand or not" I knew what kind of person I was dealing with. So yea, I did (calmly believe it or not) ask her to f*** off and mind her own business.

I was not trying to be a hard man by any means, I as not aggressive, fair enough, saying that was rude, but I am not going to be bullied by someone like this. As I said, I have no time for it, I follow all of the law's. I don't like these people, nor do I like talking to them, hence why I didn't say much to her and ended the conversation as quick as I could.

borderlinemeath

Karlitto wrote: »

Hang on a sec, from the moment she said "I wasn't asking if she was grand or not" I knew what kind of person I was dealing with. So yea, I did (calmly believe it or not) ask her to f*** off and mind her own business.

I was not trying to be a hard man by any means, I as not aggressive, fair enough, saying that was rude, but I am not going to be bullied by someone like this. As I said, I have no time for it, I follow all of the law's. I don't like these people, nor do I like talking to them, hence why I didn't say much to her and ended the conversation as quick as I could.

You don't get it

Any confrontation with somebody like this is only going to end badly for you and your dog. By reacting as you did is giving her the power to report you. She's the one holding the cards here, not you. If it's a cafe, it can be deemed public, by her and more importantly, by the dog warden.

It's really easy, all you have to say is something like, "actually, it's not a dangerous dog, but there is a restricted breed list, it doesn't make all the dogs a danger to society but puts restrictions on them because there's some bad owners out there" To explain the muzzle being off you can say that you took it off so she could have a drink of water and some treats as she's just had a good walk and she needed water. Then take out your muzzle, put it back on until the busybody goes away. End of confrontation and you might have changed her mind slightly.

Joeseph Balls

Not having a go OP but your reply probably backed up her opinion (wrong opinion ill add) of RB dogs and the old fashioned views on the RBL and the stereotypical views on their owners. Did yourself no favours with that woman, next time try the education route. Be better for everyone.

Andy-Pandy

OP, I have no doubt that your dog is a wonderful animal. But you need to realise that a) any restaurant is a public place b) some people are terrified of dogs, and a big dog like yours is extra terrifying, seeing it unmuzzled could be someones worst nightmare and c) you need to learn to handle a hostile situation calmly. If the guards or warden had been called i fear it wouldn't have ended on your side.

CBRLizzie

Sorry to say I have to agree with everyone here about your reaction. When that woman confronted me I couldn't have been nicer, apologised to her, told her I was on my way home, I'd forgotten the muzzle, blah, blah, blah. She followed me, all the while screaming at me, and I still held my calm and eventually (I was on the verge of calling the guards myself) she went away.

No-one in the park where I walked my dog had a problem with her being off lead. If anyone did, I'd call her over, put her back on the lead until they went away. I meet another girl there, who has beautiful, enormous doberman. She gets aggressive with anyone who confronts her about her dog being off lead/no muzzle. Her dog is harmless, and a beautiful animal, but because of her attitude to people she now has to walk the dog late at night. The people she was aggressive with complained about her, and those working in the park had no choice but to tell her she had to keep her dog on the lead. She did this herself by being aggressive with people. When the law isn't on your side, just smile, apologise, and wait until the horrible, pedantic person goes away. It hurts to do it, but in the long run its well worth it.

b_mac

I think people here are being unfair to the OP.

The person who confronted the OP, was not a member of AGS or a dog warden, so what gives her the power or know-how to dish out and deal the laws of the land herself? Was her next port of call to check if the OP had tax on his/her car?

Granted, she obviously and rightly so, has her right to ring the Gardai or dog warden and let them follow up the complaint.

OP - I can understand your frustration at being approached like that, but reacting in the way that you did, is not doing yourself any good.

Anytime someone decides to act as a self elected judge, jury and executioner when they see me out with my dog I just smile and ignore them. You are not legally obligated to respond to any idiot member of the public who confronts you. Just leave them follow the legal route of ringing the Gardai/dog warden and let them decide on what laws are being broken.

RainyDay

b_mac wrote: »

The person who confronted the OP, was not a member of AGS or a dog warden, so what gives her the power or know-how to dish out and deal the laws of the land herself? Was her next port of call to check if the OP had tax on his/her car?

Granted, she obviously and rightly so, has her right to ring the Gardai or dog warden and let them follow up the complaint.
[...]

Anytime someone decides to act as a self elected judge, jury and executioner when they see me out with my dog I just smile and ignore them. You are not legally obligated to respond to any idiot member of the public who confronts you. Just leave them follow the legal route of ringing the Gardai/dog warden and let them decide on what laws are being broken.

On the general issue (not this particular case), you're right to say that no one is legally obliged to any member of the public. But it is still very important that members of the public do speak up, when they have their facts right of course.

If every dog walker who lets their dog crap on the pavement and 'forgets' to have a bag to clean it up was met with a series of members of the public making it clear that their disgusting laziness is putting the health of children at risk, they might be a bit less keen to let the dog work away. Likewise for those who park in disabled parking bays, and who drive round with their fog lights on. It's not about being confrontational or aggressive - but a clear assertive message that their behaviour is unacceptable will make a big difference.

borderlinemeath

RainyDay wrote: »

On the general issue (not this particular case), you're right to say that no one is legally obliged to any member of the public. But it is still very important that members of the public do speak up, when they have their facts right of course.

If every dog walker who lets their dog crap on the pavement and 'forgets' to have a bag to clean it up was met with a series of members of the public making it clear that their disgusting laziness is putting the health of children at risk, they might be a bit less keen to let the dog work away. Likewise for those who park in disabled parking bays, and who drive round with their fog lights on. It's not about being confrontational or aggressive - but a clear assertive message that their behaviour is unacceptable will make a big difference.

Sorry this is a bit off topic..

I'm all for picking up the poo. I really am. I shovel more than my fair share of poo on a daily basis. But....I hate scaremongering, and "won't somebody think of the children" type posts. I assume you're referring to toxicariasis which is an extremely rare disease spread by roundworm contaminated faeces. In order for a child to be infected they need to ingest it, and I would hope that there would be some degree of parental responsibility exercised if a child was unfortunate enough to pick up or fall in dog faeces. The incidents of contamination are so rare that in the UK it affects less than 50 people per year. That's in a population of 60 million inhabitants so it's a minute, minute percentage. Out of that number the amount of people that actually go blind is less again, the numbers are so, so low that there's no definitive numbers. It might be one person a year, it might be zero.

Again, I'm absolutely not condoning not picking up poo, and it's a right pain the backside cleaning it off shoes (and buggy wheels if you are a parent), but the health risks are negligent, and are easily preventable with good housekeeping and responsible parenting. I don't think the health risks should be used as a scare tactic, as with all health 'risks' these things will grow legs and it will only serve to turn people off pet ownership full stop.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=78700844

http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Toxocariasis/Pages/Introduction.aspx

b_mac

RainyDay wrote: »

On the general issue (not this particular case), you're right to say that no one is legally obliged to any member of the public

Why is this case different?

sparky63

Have i told some busybody to fcuk off in the past when my dog was caught off lead, i hold up my hands. Yep. It's hard when i'm confronted with the most go out of their way, i'm right you're breaking the law and i'm gonna exercise my right to be as rude as possible to you, annoying twat. It's hard to ignore these people, but iv'e learned that silence on my part coupled with totally ignoring these people while i remove myself from the situation is better. They might feel like they won, who cares. I go home and forget about it, but i bet that person is still stressed at the audacity of my RB being off lead and how they have to tell everyone and how they can escalate there cause. Stress, let them have it. I just chalk that place off as one place i can't let him off.

Hopefully people will see the reason why the op started this thread was to find a place where the dog can be off lead without this sort of situation arising.

RainyDay

b_mac wrote: »

Why is this case different?

I didn't say it was different. I said I was commenting on the general issue.

borderlinemeath wrote: »

Sorry this is a bit off topic..

I'm all for picking up the poo. I really am. I shovel more than my fair share of poo on a daily basis. But....I hate scaremongering, and "won't somebody think of the children" type posts. I assume you're referring to toxicariasis which is an extremely rare disease spread by roundworm contaminated faeces. In order for a child to be infected they need to ingest it, and I would hope that there would be some degree of parental responsibility exercised if a child was unfortunate enough to pick up or fall in dog faeces. The incidents of contamination are so rare that in the UK it affects less than 50 people per year. That's in a population of 60 million inhabitants so it's a minute, minute percentage. Out of that number the amount of people that actually go blind is less again, the numbers are so, so low that there's no definitive numbers. It might be one person a year, it might be zero.

Again, I'm absolutely not condoning not picking up poo, and it's a right pain the backside cleaning it off shoes (and buggy wheels if you are a parent), but the health risks are negligent, and are easily preventable with good housekeeping and responsible parenting. I don't think the health risks should be used as a scare tactic, as with all health 'risks' these things will grow legs and it will only serve to turn people off pet ownership full stop.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=78700844

http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Toxocariasis/Pages/Introduction.aspx

I'm not sure that the 50 people in the UK (which would equate to say 4 people in Ireland) would agree with you, but let's say we leave the health issue aside. No-one should have to clean dog faeces from their shoes, or their buggy wheels, or their wheelchair wheels. It's just not on.

borderlinemeath

RainyDay wrote: »

I didn't say it was different. I said I was commenting on the general issue.


I'm not sure that the 50 people in the UK (which would equate to say 4 people in Ireland) would agree with you, but let's say we leave the health issue aside. No-one should have to clean dog faeces from their shoes, or their buggy wheels, or their wheelchair wheels. It's just not on.

I'm sure they wouldn't. But if they were immunocompromised to begin with they should know to exercise more caution. If it was children, then the parents were inadequately supervising. Who lets their kids ingest faeces? It's an entirely avoidable disease.

sillysmiles

But surely the point is that if the general public weren't assertive and in "reminding" people to pick up after their dogs, there would be poss all over the place because it would become the societal norm to not pick up. Thereby making it more difficult for people who are immune-compromised to exercise more caution*.

*as if they should have to.

I think it is important that members of the public should speak up when they see something wrong happening in any sphere of reference, think of the small things, like people putting their feet on seats in buses, people pushing/skipping a queue.

And whether you disagree or not with the RBL the woman was right, the dog legally should be muzzled in public. url]http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1991/en/si/0123.html[/url. She may not have approached in the right way, but you have no idea if she was coming from a place of fear. But neither did the OP handle it in the right way and thereby re-engrained fear and misunderstanding of a fantastic animal.

borderlinemeath

sillysmiles wrote: »

But surely the point is that if the general public weren't assertive and in "reminding" people to pick up after their dogs, there would be poss all over the place because it would become the societal norm to not pick up. Thereby making it more difficult for people who are immune-compromised to exercise more caution*.

*as if they should have to.

I think it is important that members of the public should speak up when they see something wrong happening in any sphere of reference, think of the small things, like people putting their feet on seats in buses, people pushing/skipping a queue.

And whether you disagree or not with the RBL the woman was right, the dog legally should be muzzled in public. url]http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1991/en/si/0123.html[/url. She may not have approached in the right way, but you have no idea if she was coming from a place of fear. But neither did the OP handle it in the right way and thereby re-engrained fear and misunderstanding of a fantastic animal.

I never said they shouldn't speak up?

My point was that using a very rare disease as a scaremongering tactic doesn't sit well with me, given how the BSL was a snapshot decision so who knows what a politician in power might do if enough momentum got behind a lobby that used it as a tactic for tighter leash controls on all breeds.

There should definitely be a civic movement towards speaking up, it should be viewed as completely unacceptable. If I saw somebody letting their dog defecate I would take a photo and send it in to my local newspaper, local facebook page (there's one locally specifically for dog fouling) along with the warden. I might not know where they live, so they may not give a hoot about me, but if their picture was printed they're bound to feel embarrassed in some way or other. Unfortunately I have never caught somebody in the act, as I walk rurally or on the beach when it's quiet.

And immunocompromised people do exactly that - exercise more caution, they know they're at risk not just from dog faeces, but from even simple things like bacteria from money, door handles etc. I have a family member that is just like that, she has to avoid a lot of what people consider 'normal' because of her condition. Yet she lives with a dog and manages to pick up the dogs poo without a problem.

tk123

This thread has gone from me imaging the OP chilling out (apart from the busybody) with his dog to thinking of that weird poo-eyes poster! http://trevorhart.blogspot.ie/

borderlinemeath

tk123 wrote: »

This thread has gone from me imaging the OP chilling out (apart from the busybody) with his dog to thinking of that weird poo-eyes poster! http://trevorhart.blogspot.ie/

Sorry, my bad, I helped drag it off topic.

That poster is scary!

RainyDay

borderlinemeath wrote: »

I'm sure they wouldn't. But if they were immunocompromised to begin with they should know to exercise more caution. If it was children, then the parents were inadequately supervising. Who lets their kids ingest faeces? It's an entirely avoidable disease.

Nice victim blaming there. Sure if all those girls didn't wear those damn sexy short skirts, they wouldn't get raped - right?

This is not a parenting issue. No parent can bring their kids to the park and microscopically examine the football everytime the kid picks it up. No parent can guarantee that a toddler won't stumble, and then put their hand to their mouth before the parent has a chance to clean it up.

It is indeed an "entirely avoidable disease". It is avoidable by dog owners cleaning up after their dogs.

DBB

I've held off intervening in the interests of discussion, but all this talk of dog crap, parenting etc is just getting way too off-topic. If all of that is something people would like to see discussed, start a new thread on it.
But no more here.
Do not reply to this post on-thread.
Thanks,
DBB

gizmo555

I've always wondered how these regulations work - there's no scientific way of identifying a particular breed, still less a cross breed, so how can the guards or dog wardens prove in a court of law that a given dog is, for example, a Rottweiler?

juniord

there used to be dog events in the field at the back of campions pub on the malahide road ,maybe ask if you could use there o/p

juniord

gizmo555 wrote: »

I've always wondered how these regulations work - there's no scientific way of identifying a particular breed, still less a cross breed, so how can the guards or dog wardens prove in a court of law that a given dog is, for example, a Rottweiler?

the opinion of the warden or garda will go a long way in court,

DBB

juniord wrote: »

the opinion of the warden or garda will go a long way in court,

Yes, this is pretty much how it works in Ireland. If they're in any doubt they can recruit the services of an expert witness, someone who would be considered to have expertise in dog breeds, such as a breeder, or a vet.
It's all very well having the warden calling it, until you come across a warden who doesn't know the difference between a Husky and an Akita. Not looking at anyone in particular in Clare. No, not me. :rolleyes:

juniord

i read of a case in england where a dog was impounded as APBT type by the police , the owner brought pedigree papers for a staffordshire to court with a letter from the breeder stating they were for the dog , the owner lost the case and the dog was PTS

mosi

juniord wrote: »

i read of a case in england where a dog was impounded as APBT type by the police , the owner brought pedigree papers for a staffordshire to court with a letter from the breeder stating they were for the dog , the owner lost the case and the dog was PTS

That reminds me of a case I read of in the UK where two dogs were seized and one was deemed to be "of type" and the other wasn't...they were both from the same litter!

DBB

juniord wrote: »

i read of a case in england where a dog was impounded as APBT type by the police , the owner brought pedigree papers for a staffordshire to court with a letter from the breeder stating they were for the dog , the owner lost the case and the dog was PTS

In the UK, they have a list of morphometric measurements by which they establish if a dog is "of type"... that is, they take a number of measurements of girth, height, length etc. If the dog conforms to these measurements, and I assume looks "of type" too, then the dog may be deemed illegal. I find it hard to believe that a Staffie would conform anywhere close to the measurements they use for "of type" dogs, so one would have to question the real back-story behind whatever it is you read. There is usually more than meets the eye going on in cases like this.
In addition to that, if the dog was PTS, then there was almost certainly something else going on in this case. There seems to be a misinterpretation here of what the law in the UK allows regarding dogs "of type".
An owner of a dog "of type" can apply to the courts to have their dog added to the Index of Exempted Dogs (IED). This exempts banned dogs from automatic PTS, as long as the owners can show that the dog is likely not to be a danger (they must get an assessment carried out by a certified behaviourist to show this), and they must agree to carry out a number of procedures, for example, their dog must be neutered and chipped, must be muzzled and on lead at all times in a public place, must be insured against 3rd party liability, and must be kept in a properly enclosed premises/garden.
If an "of type" dog is PTS it usually means one of a few things:
1. It means the owner didn't bother their arse (or perhaps couldn't afford) to get their dog exempted via the IED
2. It means the dog has been involved in an incident which required its seizure, no matter what breed it happened to be.

ferretone

That's an excellent statement of the situation there, DBB. Anyone else agree that this post should be stickied, as this is something that doeas and will come up again and again? DBB, I would love to hear your opinion on the anti-BSL campaign that is going on over here right now.

I love it, of course, and especially love that Andreac is involved, but can't help feeling that the whole thing has the pretty naivete of a guy who has just not yet been worn down by the tyranny that this pervasive view seems to have gained within so many of the levels of our public service. And as for the government itself, well their response to him speaks of surprise that this topic ever was mentioned again, firstly, and secondly, determination that it would never be discussed again, as it was so very unimportant to them.

I'd love if this issue could be revisited, revised and revoked, but looking at what we have for government, at every level, I sadly do not think this will ever happen

Bullseye1

Has the OP located a suitable location to walk their RBLs off leash? I had not read?