Category: Dog Bites

Posted on

Postal Carriers at Risk

Locally, our media is reporting an increase in dog bites to Mail Carriers.  In addition to delivering bills, something else is going on when a carrier comes to your door and it deals with the psychology or your dog.

When you are not home, your dog sees his job as protecting your home.  His job is to frighten away any possible intruders.  When the carrier comes to your house, your dog barks at the carrier and the carrier leaves.  Job done.  The dog’s aggression toward the carrier as saved the day.

When this event occurs day after day, your dog begins to think of him/herself  as invincible.  Every time he/she barks at the carrier, the carrier flees.  In every incident the dog wins.  Given the opportunity to take this up a notch, if the dog has an opportunity to bite the carrier the dog, the dog is more likely to do so.

Mail carriers are bitten because they are doing their jobs.  Mail carriers are bitten because dog owners are not doing their jobs.  This has become such an issue that the Postal Service encourages communities to participate in Dog Bite Prevention Week.  As I always say, “Pet owners should treat their dog as if it could bite.”

Posted on

Dog Attacks

Nothing causes me to step up on my soapbox faster than reading about dog attacks.  Media sources in the Cayman Islands report, “Dog attacks on the rise.”  It makes you wonder if dogs are suddenly becoming more violent.  That doesn’t make sense, so the only thing left is pet owners are becoming dumber.

A few days ago someone videotaped a dog attacking a mail carrier in Detroit.  I love that the only assistance people offer is to videotape incidents.  Actually, I think that after getting sufficient video tape, the person actually did step in.  But, I am not ranting about the videotape.  This is all about the owner.

After being told about the incident, the dog’s owner, asking to not be identified, said, “He’s a big clown, he’s friendly.  He’s not vicious.”  He made it sound like it was the mail carrier’s fault for delivering mail to his house; after all, it is “a dog’s job to defend its home.”

Detroit’s animal control department took possession of the dog and according to the dog’s owner, they plan to “kill the dog.”  The dog does what dogs do.  The mail carrier does what carriers do.  The fault of this incident falls on the dog’s owner for not confining his dog.

The problem with society is that not enough dog owners are sued for the actions of their dogs.  The dog is killed, problem solved.  People like this dog owner should suffer sufficient financial loss to be convinced that he should never own another dog.  He is not smart enough to see the role that he played in putting the mail carrier at risk.  Usually when something like this plays out, we walk away shaking our heads thinking, “Thank God that it wasn’t a child.”

Posted on

Dog Training

Dog trainers have evolved over the years as parents have evolved in raising children.  We have become a society that demands that correction be given in the form that appears to be a reward for the dog’s or child’s misbehavior.

Several years ago smart dog trainers stopped making public displays of training dogs.  They used public parks to facilitate training in hope that people would see them and would seek their assistance with their own pet.  Not any more.  Just as parents fear being in a shopping mall when their child or children act up.  Bystanders took on roles to determine how the correction should be administrated.

I learned to train dogs in the military.  Our lives depended on the dog following commands.  We needed the dog to listen and stop chewing on a person when then person became compliant and stopped resisting.  I did not find the training techniques abusive, just effective.  When the public first started complaining about the techniques in use by certain trainers, I figured that the economic principle of supply and demand would force the evolution of training techniques. 

If people started avoiding the “rough” trainers and sought out the “gentle” trainers, the tough (rough) trainers would adapt.  That is how evolution works, you adapt to the environment so as to survive and place food on your table.  The world did evolve and trainers became kinder and gentler; some even had their own television shows. 

There have been no studies that suggest that the kindler approach to dog training is more effective.  I think that it was less about the technique and more about the engagement of the owner with their dog.  The same is true with raising children, the more engaged that a parent is with their child, the better the child will behave.  Too many parents leave it up to the school system to raise their children; but, this is a blog about pets, not how people raise their children.

Posted on

Leash 101

Welcome to Leash 101, your introduction to the use of leashes.  Let’s see a show of hands of those who believe that they have 100% control of their dogs off leash.  If you have raised your hand, you are one of the biggest threats to your neighborhood and need this class.

A leash is a physical connection between a dog and the dog’s owner.  For a leash to be effective, it must be of reasonable length and under the control of someone physically capable of controlling the dog.  A dog being walk on a flexi-leash by a six year old is NOT under control.

Most ordinances require that the length of a leash should be between six to ten feet and should be of sufficient strength to maintain control.  String, ribbon, and twine are insufficient material to constitute a leash.  Many owners purchase flexi-leashes that allow the leash to expand out to 50 feet or more.  These leashes, although not legal, give your dog sufficient room in open areas; these leashes are not suitable on trails.  If you lose sight of your dog, while on a leash, the leash is too long.

In order to achieve maximal control, the person controlling the leash should be of sufficient size and strength to control the dog.  This is called “walking the dog.”  It is not uncommon to see a dog pulling along its owner in an uncontrolled fashion, this is called “the dog walking the person.”  A person with reasonable intelligence would see the dangers of failing to control your dog.  Most incidents involve dogs walking their owners.

If you cannot control the dog that you are walking, look in the mirror.  You need to talk to that person into getting a smaller dog before someone is hurt.

There seems to be a misunderstanding as to when to use a leash.  Smart people place a leash of their dog while in a confined space before taking the dog outside.  Animal shelters are full with animals who once belonged to people who were not smart.

When we adopt animals, we discuss the need to keep a dog leashed until the dog accepts his new home.  I am constantly amazed at the number of times people get their new pet home only to lose the pet when they decided to open the door of their car to let the dog run off leash to the front door of their house.  We have fine-tuned our adoption screening process and have yet to discover a true test for identifying stupidity.  These are the same people who think that their adoption fee should be refunded because the shelter was negligent in adopting the dog to a stupid person.

The leash is your friend.  It keeps your dog from being hit by a car.  Keeps your neighbors from being frightened or bitten.  Keeps you out of court when animal control picks up your dog.  Your leash is one of the single most effective tools for keeping you out of trouble.  It is so important, I suggest that you give your leash a name… make it personal.

Posted on

Trusting our Pets

It is not uncommon that people use their pets as an indicator for who to have relationships with.  On dating sites, you see comments like, “Must like pets.”  What they are really trying to say is, “My pet must like you.”  We seem to believe that pets have some psychic ability to discern the character of people. 

Pets are a bad judge of character.  Put them on a chain in front of your house and they hate everyone.  Pets hate delivery people and these are the folks that deliver presents to you on your birthday and Christmas.  Pets should hate animal control officers, but with a chocolate chip cookie, a pet will become their best friend (and no, one chocolate chip cookie will not kill a pet).  Let’s face it, you cannot trust your pet’s insights.

As pet owners, we place too much trust in our pets.  We don’t know what is going on in their heads.  If we did, we would have the ability to prevent dog bites.  Pets are like people, they are unpredictable.  Every year we read about a dog killing his or her owner.  Who could have predicted that?

Animal Control Officers become sensitive to the potential dangers of situations that put people and pets at odds with one another.  Too often we witness pet owners disregarding our suggestions, only to discover that we were right.  My experience as an animal control officer is that pet owners are the ones who know the least about their pets.

Posted on

Service Animals Out of Control

The issue has gotten so far out of control with people claiming that there dog is a service animal that Idaho is considering creating  laws under Senate Bill 1312 of making the false representation a misdemeanor, calling it “unlawful use of a service dog”. 

Although this is a good step forward to stop this abuse.  I am afraid that once the Bill is implemented, the legislators will see that they were negligent in not including other animals.  Idaho animal shelters might see an increase in cat adoptions.

The Americans with Disability Act (ADA) has allowed this to get too far out of control.  In an effort to protect the disabled, they have created a mechanism to allow overwhelming abuse.  This abuse is placing people at risk. 

Over a year ago, a child was “mauled” by a pit bull at the Portland International Airport that the owner claimed to be a service animal.  The case is now going to court because Alaska Airlines allowed the dog through the airport with out being in a crate.  I think the law suit is misdirected; the ADA is responsible because they refuse to create measures to prevent abuse.  I believe the ADA believes that it is better to protect one disabled person from unreasonable questioning than to protect society from the abuse of their system. 

I think Idaho is taking a good step to forcing compliance; but, until the ADA recognizes the abuse of their of their system, people will continue to be placed in harms way due to laws that are intended to protect our disabled population. 

I recently came across an article in which a guy was complaining that his therapy coyote was not recognized to assist him.  Forget the fact that coyotes are wild animals and cannot be vaccinated for rabies. 

It furthers my belief that people feel lost living in a big pond and that they have to do something, anything, to stand out and be recognized, to be seen, even if that something is very, very stupid.  So many people have become lost in life.  It is too bad that Gamin cannot produce GPS for the human soul.  To keep them on the path of life.  I suppose that is why we have churches.

In the meantime, we will clutch our therapy object and try to make our way though our insecurities from moment to moment.

 

Posted on

Adopters in Harms Way

A current trend to increase adoptions is for animal shelter personnel ignoring the aggressive behavior of an animal as reported by the animal’s owner or keeper.  Shelter personnel wish the animal to have a clean slate and treat the animal as having no background information; they are confident that their own evaluations are sufficient to determine the animals fitness for adoption.

It is not uncommon for various factions in a shelter to view an animal in different light.  One of the most common problem that my last shelter faced was our volunteers posting glowing comments about animals on social media that were not consistent with the staff’s evaluations.  The volunteers felt that they knew better because of the behavior that they witnessed when walking the animal, even though the previous owner and staff assessed the animal differently.  They didn’t realize that they were observing the animal from a very small window.  People would come in to the shelter and discover that the volunteers lied to them so as to facilitate the placement of the animal.  Fortunately for the community, our shelter staff had the integrity to report the correct information or refuse to accept the adoption application.

This trend of passing marginal animals or animals with aggression in their history is getting animal shelters in trouble.  I frequently read about cases in which an adopter is subject to a serious incident and then finds that the animal’s history of aggression was not shared with them.  It became so commonplace in Virginia that laws were drafted to force adoption organizations to give out the animal’s history, good or bad.

Many shelters have placed their animal placements ahead of public safety due to the pressures of being no kill.  Not only have people been harmed, but many shelters have been sued for their callous actions.

Posted on

Perception

Dog owners have the worst case of perception.  For that reason, I have found employment in the animal control field for over thirty years.  Neighbors, on the other hand have finely tuned perception.  There is nothing worse than a dog owner maintaining one or more aggressive dogs behind a flimsy fence.  Commonsense would dictate that the dog owner would want to keep his neighbors safe.  My career has been founded on the lack of commonsense that is found in many dog owners.

The problem with perception is the legal aspects associated with whether a person’s perception is real or imagined.  Until the aggressive dogs break through the fence and mauls a neighborhood child, the perception is imagined.  It is most unfortunate that a child has to suffer to prove the perception real.

People who choose to own aggressive dogs are evidence of a fracture of our society in which these folks believe their rights are greater than the risk they place on their neighbors.  I have witnessed neighborhoods in which owners of (perceived) aggressive dogs are turned loose.  I have seen the same neighbors begin to carry means of protection from the dogs.

The problem with pet ownership is that there is no examination that proves a person fitness to be a pet owner.  The fact that people like myself have made careers in this field is evidence that we live in a world of unfit pet owners.

Parents should constantly watch their children because they are usually the litmus test when determining the intent of a dog’s actions.

Posted on

Dog Bites

The leading cause of dog bites are dog owners.  Most dog owners are oblivious to the fact that their dog has the potential to bite and callous of the conditions that might lead up to their pet biting.  For that reason, one of the most common phrases that a dog bite victim hears prior to being bitten is the voice of the dog’s owner yelling, “Don’t worry, he won’t bite.”

This is one of the greatest threats to our community in which dog owners fail to step up and accept responsibility for the dog bite potential that their pet presents.  Failing to accept that responsibility places people at risk.

Dog bites have become so common that people have become judicial witnesses based on “junk science” that attempts to win dog bite cases by blaming dog bites on the victims rather than recognizing the behavior of the dog.  The notion is that the dog has a reason for biting a person, but we just don’t understand what that reason is; so a self proclaimed individual will take the stand in court, claiming to be a profession witness, to explain what the victim did to justify the bite.

These “experts’ have created a niche in which they make the dog owner the victim on an unjust justice system that puts humans before animals.  These “professionals” are lifted up by their followers that own potentially dangerous dog breeds.

To be honest, some people  provoke dogs to the point of getting bit.   That is one more reason for dog owners to consider their liability in owning a large dog and failing to provide proper boundaries between their dog and potential victims.  Some dogs have less tolerance towards being provoked; some dogs don’t need any provocation.

Posted on

Pitbulls

The first pitbull arrived in my city in the mid 1980’s. The owner wanted to have a breed with a reputation; this dog did not live up to that reputation’ it was a very friendly dog. The original desire to own a pitbull was for owners to claim that their dog was the meanest on the block. For that reason, breeders began breeding dangerous characteristics into the breed. Clearly, the breed was attracted to the worst pet owners.

Since bad pet owners do not believe in sterilizing their pets, pitbulls have become the most dominant breed in animal shelters. This has created a difficult time for shelters trying to become no-kill; to maintain their adoption numbers with their shelter intakes being 50% pitbulls.

Pitbulls are not necessarily a bad breed, they just require an unusually responsible pet owner. As pet owners have become increasingly lazy, finding a good owner for a pitbull is problematic. It is not a breed that you can just take to the dog park and turn loose; as with any powerful breed they require constant oversight.

Incidents of dog bites is proof of poor pet ownership. Foolish pet owners fail to realize the bite potential of their pet.  There is a growing group that will try  to tell unsuspecting potential adopters that the pitbull is no different than any other breed.  This is a false narrative.  Although pitbulls are one of the most loyal breeds, the breed has genetic traits towards aggression.  The aggressive traits can be controlled, but require a watchful pet owner.  Most acts of aggression by pitbulls are the result of the owner being too lazy to accept their responsibility for keeping the breed.

Due to the unpredictability of the breed and the bad owners that were attacked to the breed, many communities decided to protect themselves by banning the breed.  Pitbull owners were eventually able to circumvent the ban by identifying their pitbulls as a service animals.   Due to the abuse by reckless owners, many airlines stopped permitting “emotional support animals”  in the passenger section of the airplane unless the animal is “professionally certified.”  This brought a new internet business of pet owners being able to obtain fake certifications.

There has been a great effort to turn people’s attitudes away from seeing the pitbull breed as a potentially dangerous breed.   The problem that this breed faces is that they belong to owners who fail to accept the dog’s potential to do harm.  We continue to see incidents of people injured by the breed and it all due to the stupidity of the dog’s owner.

I appreciate seeing news reports of pet owners being charged with reckless endangerment when their dogs have repeatedly bitten people.  I hate to see animals destroyed for the stupidity of their owners, but euthanizing an aggressive dog is the only way to protect the community from an ignorant pet owner.  Unfortunately, we have far too many of them in our communities.