# 100 stitches needed to repair dog bite



## mwmr (Apr 8, 2006)

I tend to keep an eye on this local paper about every day so I will try to post updates but this appears very sad.

100 stitches need to repair dog bite


----------



## mwmr (Apr 8, 2006)

I called and got a subscriber's password and read the entire story which I copied here.

A Columbus boy attacked by a German shepherd needed more than 100 stitches to mend bite marks across his face.
Jakob Kelso, 9, said he was leaving a neighbor's home on Pence Street Thursday when the German shepherd bolted from the house and jumped on him outside.
The dog chewed on Jakob's face, tearing away skin, knocking out a permanent tooth and splitting his nose.
"I stood up and tried to run away, but I couldn't," Jakob said Monday. "I tripped, and the dog got me."
The official story from authorities says Jakob went inside the dog owner's home and was attacked, although he did not engage the dog. "There are a couple conflicting reports, but the evidence indicates the dog was in the house from statements by varying people," said Kevin Konetzka, director of Animal Control. The dog's owner, Deborah Cash, declined to comment. Jakob's brother, Jordan, said he and his brother had been jumping on the trampoline at the Cash residence at 211 Pence St. when he realized they needed to go home around 8 p.m. Jordan said he was a few steps ahead of Jakob, who had stopped to put on his shoes outside the house. "I heard the scream, so I ran down there," Jordan said. One of the boys who lived at the Cash house tried to stop the dog, Jakob said.
"The dog jumped over his foot and ran at me," he said.
Jakob said the next thing he remembers is waking up in an ambulance.
He had to undergo a roughly two-hour surgery, which included sewing 35 stitches to close wounds below the skin and 100 more to connect the skin back to his face.
Jakob, a third-grader at Fodrea Community School, will miss a week of school recuperating inside his mother's apartment.
Konetzka said the dog has a valid rabies vaccination, noting that another officer spoke to the dog's veterinarian.
The dog must be quarantined inside the Cash's residence for 10 days and be walked on a leash.
Officers will do routine checks at the residence and speak with the dog owners to make sure they are following the quarantine order.
Jakob's mother, Annie Kelso, said she thinks the dog could attack again.
"There's other kids that live around this neighborhood," Annie Kelso said. "If that dog can do it to my kid, he can do it again."


T_he really sad part of this whole thing is this is Greta's brother. I know this dog (or thought I did) and didn't see this coming._


----------



## Kayos and Havoc (Oct 17, 2002)

Who knows what really happened. Sad for the child. And the dog will probably be PTS.


----------



## JAguirre (Dec 19, 2000)

I know we love our dogs and would like to think that *they* could never do anything like that, but ... you just never know.

And ... you can never be too safe. For the most part, I trust my dogs, but I would never trust them 100% around any kid - especially not my. It is very sad and the kid will probably be afraid of dogs, especially GSDs, for the rest of his life and the dog will probably be PTS.


----------



## jsmurray31 (Oct 28, 2007)

> Originally Posted By: JAguirreI know we love our dogs and would like to think that *they* could never do anything like that, but ... you just never know.
> 
> And ... you can never be too safe. For the most part, I trust my dogs, but I would never trust them 100% around any kid - especially not my. It is very sad and the kid will probably be afraid of dogs, especially GSDs, for the rest of his life and the dog will probably be PTS.


I don't understand you not trusting your dogs 100%. I get it with some - take my situation.......Tucson (RIP) I would *never* leave him with kids or other dogs as I did not trust him completely. Tripper - I do not trust him 100% either, especially with his recent behavior with Bosley.

BUT, Lexi and Bosley would never hurt a fly. I would trust them with anyone, anytime, anyplace.

Are you saying you don't trust your dogs because of behavior you have witnessed or just any dog in particular? I am not trying to start an argument, I just want to understand what you are saying.


----------



## Lauri & The Gang (Jun 28, 2001)

Until a dog is capable of understanding right and wrong at a moral level I will never trust ANY dog 100%.

Heck, I don't trust people that much either!


----------



## doggiedad (Dec 2, 2007)

i think it's a good idea not to trust your dogs 100%. as friendly as my dog is with children, adults, cats, horses, i would never leave him alone with any of them. maybe it's more of don't trust the situation. don't leave your dog in a room or in a yard with a child. don't leave your dog in a pasture or barn with horses. do i think my dog will do something bad, no i don't but i don't risk it. i don't leave my dogs in the yard unattended. yeah, i let them out and i'll go and put a load of laundry in the washer but then i go right back to them and my yard is completely fenced in but i feel better keeping an eye on them. i can leave my dog in front of the local store and he stays. i ask people to go up to him and pet him and then pick up his leash and try to get him to move, he doesn't. now i'm standing in the store looking at him. now i do this for training to stay but i would never go into the store and purchase something because then i couldn't see him. i love my dogs. i don't want anything to happen to them and i don't want something unwanted happening to someone else. trust them 100% as long as you can see them.


----------



## doggiedad (Dec 2, 2007)

even if they understand right from wrong at a moral level doesn't mean they're going to make the right decision, people don't. i'm agreeing with you. don't trust them 100%.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

So did the kid go inside the dog's home?

If this is the case, can we really expect our dogs to attack adult tresspassers and leave child tresspassers alone?

If the child was walking down the street and the dog tore out of the house and attacked the child without provocation, then he probably does need to be PTS. Sorry. 

What a bummer story for GSDs. 

The child says that he tried to run which is understandable, but a problem. Still the dog did not go for the feet or legs, it went for the face. And the amount of stitches required -- Most GSDs can give a healthy bite, but generally they bite once or twice, but do not maul, not unless they are specifically trained to attack and continue to attack until they are given the command to stop. A dog that mauls like this is probably better off PTS. Or at least it is probably better for everyone concerned, even the owners.


----------



## Timber1 (May 19, 2007)

I agree with you on this one, and have a nicely trained European GSD. But as the best advisor I know told me after evaluating Timber. He is a great and well tained European GS male. But under no circumstances should you ever put him in a position in which he will become overly aggressive.

As for the specific attack. I cannot imagine a decently trained and "Normal" shepherd attacking in the manner described.


----------



## mwmr (Apr 8, 2006)

> Originally Posted By: selzerSo did the kid go inside the dog's home?



I think you hit the nail on the head.

I don't know yet, ( i started this thread before I realized this was Greta's brother) but I will.
Great people, salt of the earth, and very good with their pets. I will go out on a limb and surmise the dog was in the house and the boy somehow instigated this or found himself somewhere he'd been told to not be. I have spent enough time with this family to know how they treat guests visiting. The dogs are put up. If I find out otherwise I'll fess up and be honest but I'm standing up for some very decent folks.
The fact the family has Boomer speaks volumes in my opinion about how the incident is being reviewed by the authorities.


----------



## Chloedancer (Mar 13, 2008)

When ya'll say not to trust the dog around children, do you mean your own kids? Mine are getting older and my youngest is almost 8. 

What bothers me is neighborhood children that come around to play. Chloe is always on leash or inside BUT you never know. When these kids play in my yard with my children, I allow Chloe to socialize with them, to know that kids are okay. She has never been aggressive with people YET but she is only 7 months.

I would like to find a "balance". I want her to be leary of strangers, for protection reasons, but not to the point where she would attack for no reason.


----------



## DrDoom (Nov 7, 2007)

I would think if she is being socialized your risk for an unprovocated attack is MUCH lower, so you're doing good.


----------



## JAguirre (Dec 19, 2000)

> Originally Posted By: ACSI don't understand you not trusting your dogs 100%. I get it with some - take my situation.......Tucson (RIP) I would *never* leave him with kids or other dogs as I did not trust him completely. Tripper - I do not trust him 100% either, especially with his recent behavior with Bosley.
> 
> BUT, Lexi and Bosley would never hurt a fly. I would trust them with anyone, anytime, anyplace.
> 
> Are you saying you don't trust your dogs because of behavior you have witnessed or just any dog in particular? I am not trying to start an argument, I just want to understand what you are saying.


I am saying that I don’t trust any dog 100%. Even the best trained dogs may react on instinct at times – nothing personal is meant by it – it’s just the way it is. A warning bite that makes contact might have been relaying a message of “quit blowing in my face” and would be considered a vicious attack by the public – even though it was only a provoked warning. If I can’t be there to supervise how people are acting around my dogs, then I can’t trust my dogs 100%.

I have 4 children aged (gasp) 14 to 26 years, and all have been raised around GSDs. They’ve been taught to respect our dogs for what they are and are well aware that while they seem almost human, they aren’t. I trust my dogs with my kids because my kids know how to respect them and how to handle them. None of these dogs has given me any reason to be concerned, however from experience I’d rather err on the side of caution.

The experience I have referred to was a result of a dog bite to my own face by my own dog (an Aussie) which required 87 stitches. There was no provocation and I’d had the dog for its entire life – a little over 3 years. Looking back, there were signs that the dog was sketchy, but not aggressive. I trusted him implicitly and assumed he wouldn’t hurt a fly.


----------



## SunCzarina (Nov 24, 2000)

With my own kids, I trust Morgan 100%. It's other peoples kids I don't trust with my dog! 

Morgan always wears a leash when my kids have friends over. Rather be safe than sorry if another boy push fights one of my boys, boy cries, Morgan goes into protection mode then I'd have 2 hurt children and a subsequent lawsuit. It's just common sense.


----------



## kutzro357 (Jan 15, 2002)

> Originally Posted By: SunCzarinaWith my own kids, I trust Morgan 100%.


No dog should ever be considered 100% safe around any kids.


----------



## jsmurray31 (Oct 28, 2007)

> Originally Posted By: JAguirre
> 
> 
> > Originally Posted By: ACSI don't understand you not trusting your dogs 100%. I get it with some - take my situation.......Tucson (RIP) I would *never* leave him with kids or other dogs as I did not trust him completely. Tripper - I do not trust him 100% either, especially with his recent behavior with Bosley.
> ...


Thank you very much for the explanation - that makes total sense. 

I, too was raised to respect all animals, but not everyone is. I should respect that to protect my dogs from putting them in a situation where they potentially could act out.

Again, thanks for your time with the explanation.


----------



## DSudd (Sep 22, 2006)

WOW the poor child. Now I have a different perspective on Rocky playing with kids. He has never been agressive toward any family or friends and he seems to be very gentle with the litter ones (youngest is 2-1/2 niece). From now on I will make sure that DH or I supervises his playtime with any child.

I would hate for him to get hurt and try to defend himself or attempt an alpha role over a child.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

I trust Pippy 100% around any kids. He is an English Setter. Someone would have to jump on him to make him bite. My own dogs are not raised around kids so no, I do not trust them. If the kid is quiet and well behaved and I am only dealing with one of my dogs and there are no extenuating circumstances, then maybe I will let my dog be petted, otherwise, it is not worth it in my opinion.


----------



## mwmr (Apr 8, 2006)

This was in the "Letters to the Editor" section of the hometown newspaper this incident occurred in.

Justice not done in attack by dog

Received: March 23
My grandson was attacked by a German shepherd March 20. He is 9 years old. It took 100 stitches to close his face up. He might need another operation later down the road.
Here's my problem: Why didn't animal control take the dog? We were told because it happened on the dog's property they couldn't take the dog.
Animal control never once talked to my grandson or his brother who was there. They did talk to the owners of the dog, which by the way has changed their story twice to my daughter.
It shouldn't matter if it happened inside the house or outside the house the dog attacked my grandson. He is dangerous.
Plus there should be a law that if a dog attacks a human being that dog should be put to sleep. I'm a dog owner of 15 years, and I love my dog, but if my dog attacks anyone he would be dead before 911 was called.
Here's my problem: Don't we have a leash law? Animal control said we don't, that as long the dog is in his yard and the owners have control over him.
Well, they didn't just come over and look at my grandson's face. Plus animal control said he thinks my grandson was in the dog's face, cause all dogs attack the hands.
Are you that stupid? Most people who are being attacked by a dog put their hands up to protect their face. In my grandson's case he was putting his shoes on when the dog attacked. He didn't have time to react. He's only 9.
I also read today where animal control wants to make it a law that all animals need to wear a tag or be microchipped.
Let's also add if a dog attacks a human being put the dog to sleep, cause the dog attacked once, and it will do it again.
My grandson got to look at his face for the first time Friday, and he cried out "I'm ugly, and everyone is going to make fun of me."
Come on Columbus, let's change the law.
I can't believe you would keep a dog in your house with your kid knowing what your dog did to another child (my grandson).

Her last line speaks volumes.
But I'm still intrigued by what I perceive as the duplicity of the majority of these incidents. The unknowns and the unanswered. Did the child provoke this? Is the dog unstable? I found out thru a mutual friend last night that there were kids in the neighborhood the owner had said were teasing the dog. I don't know if these are the kids she was talking about. Knowing the Man of the house as I do, I can state he would personally resolve the situation immediately if in any way he thought the dog at fault. 
There's sides that will be taken here, but which is 
Morally right? Legally? Civil?
Just the right thing to do?
I know this family and dog well. I fully respect their judgment when it involves their pets.
I can also hear that grandmother,
"I can't believe you would keep a dog in your house with your kid knowing what your dog did to another child”


----------



## mwmr (Apr 8, 2006)

Just came across this further update and report from a state level tv station site
Channel Six News 

quoted from story
"The animal control department said the owner plans to destroy the dog."
Ahh poor Boomer


----------



## kutzro357 (Jan 15, 2002)

What is the link to the letter to the editor?


----------



## JAguirre (Dec 19, 2000)

Very sad.


----------



## melonyjhsn (Mar 8, 2007)

This is heartbreaking and should go to show that something like this can happen to any dog owner.

Kids will be kids so it’s not the little boy’s fault in any way, shape, or form. Doesn’t matter what he did (if anything)- he’s nine years old and it’s the job of adults to protect him. Dogs will be dogs and it’s the job of the owners to keep them safe and out of trouble. IMHO the two should only mix under supervision- period.

I’m not a parent and I don’t have any neighborhood kids running around so that may be why I have a hard time empathizing with the owners on this one. What on earth are they thinking? From the video it’s pretty clear that they don’t have a fence in their front yard (where the trampoline is) and it looks like they don’t have one in the back either. Why was he loose with company over in the first place? With kids coming in and out and the chances of the door being left open and no fence to boot….. It’s just asking for trouble in so many different ways. 

In their place I would have this dog put to sleep without protest. In fact I wouldn’t even hesitate and the appointment would be made for the day the quarantine is over. The boy’s wounds are pretty serious and I’d fear for the safety of others in the future- especially with children living in the house. I’ll bet the dog isn’t mean or ‘vicious’ as the news called him but it’s not worth the risk that someone else could get hurt.


----------



## ken k (Apr 3, 2006)

i`m sorry that happened to the 9 year old, sad, very sad, and I blame the owners of the GSD regardless of how it happened, my Max is very well trained and a TDI dog, 3 things my instructor taught us, #1 dont trust`em, #2 dont trust`em, and #3 dont trust`em, and that applies to ALL breeds, I never assume anything when Max is around people and I`m always watching his demeanor when were interacting with people, even though he has never and maybe never will make an aggressive move towards anyone, I would never trust him


----------



## Maedchen (May 3, 2003)

_Kids will be kids so it’s not the little boy’s fault in any way, shape, or form. Doesn’t matter what he did (if anything)- he’s nine years old and it’s the job of adults to protect him. Dogs will be dogs and it’s the job of the owners to keep them safe and out of trouble. IMHO the two should only mix under supervision- period._

Ditto!








I've even had children walking into my house when we weren't home- just the dogs (including a foster GSD)-, but still, they didn't attack anyone. But I learned to lock my door after I found out.









My guess would be that the dog got totally agitated of the boy jumping on the trampoline. As soon as he got the chance to get out, he attacked. 
I have kids coming over all the time and we all go out and they play with the dogs, but my dogs don't get irritated or teased by other children. I trust them 100%, but I still always supervise- you just never know.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

kids are kids. When I was four and my sister was six and my brothers were eight and ten, they got me through the milk chute of the neighbors house. I unlocked the door and we helped ourselves to the cola in their refrigerator. 

Some dogs would not attack a four year old that breaks into their home. Some would not attack a six year old. But somewhere you have to draw a line. 

I am not saying that this child did break into the home, it sounds like he did not, but if he did, would the grandmother still want the dog euthanized. She says if a dog bites a human, euthanize it. Sorry, but I cannot disagree more. 

We did not break into the person's house on the other side. They had what appeared to be a gigantic GSD named Condor. Everyone knew Condor and kids even my age kept their distance. 

The gas station often had two GSDs: King and Queenie and later Duke and Duchess, there was also a Prince. Their field was not fenced in. King did bite my brother as he walked down the sidewalk toward our house. There was no irate parent, no lawsuit, no retaliation, and no euthanizing of the dog. We knew King could be mean and stayed away from him. 

I guess my point is that we generally say "Good Dog" when we hear of one of our own that does his job when he is called upon. Generally the perp is an adult. We cannot expect our animals to differentiate between children and adults when faced with a trespass though. So which is it? Will we euthanize a dog that attacks a child if the child is committing a trespass of some sort within the dogs home? And is there an age under which the animal is liable regardless to circumstances?


----------



## melonyjhsn (Mar 8, 2007)

Is there an age when children should take the blame when they are bit by a dog? I would say it is way past 9 years old. It would be the point when a child can understand and reason their way through the logic and have enough self control not to turn around 5 seconds later and do what their parents just told them not to do. It worries me to see people sticking up for dogs and not doing the same for children. What the heck is that about? It’s the responsibility of all adults to protect children they come in contact with. I know it doesn’t always work out that way but it should and if someone can’t do that then they don’t need to put themselves into a position where they are responsible for the welfare of other people’s kids. 

My brother was bitten by a GSD when he was 7 years old. He went to a friend’s house and opened the door without knocking and went in. The family knew him and he knew the dog so he didn’t think twice about it. The dog gave him a small bite with the very tip of his teeth on his arm that required 3 stitches for his lack of manners. Was this understandable? Sure. The dog didn’t do anything wrong under these conditions and didn’t overdo the bite like what happened to the other kid. I should say that my brother didn’t do anything wrong either- he was just reasoning like a child. It ended up being a teachable moment for all concerned. My brother learned that there are real consequences for going into people’s houses uninvited and the owners learned that they shouldn’t leave their door unlocked if they planed to continue letting their kids have friends over. Everyone apologized to each other and we all lived happily ever after. That kind of an incident shouldn’t cost a dog his life or become something that gets run through the court system. 

Something like what happened here should IMHO. This bite would fall under the category of excessive force if we were to use our own legal terms. It’s over the top in Dogdom too… It’s a shame that it happened at all but it did happen and now it’s time to pay up. It just goes to show that we should be careful of what we wish for. So many people get GSDs for ‘protection’ of home and property. Why I wonder is this so important to people? Just having one is enough of a deterrent to get the job done. In my case, my dogs are all crated when I’m away from home or can not keep an eye on them. It’s as much for their protection as it is for other people. Frankly, my stuff isn’t worth the risk of having anyone injured on accident or having my dogs pay the ultimate price for biting an intruder.

On the flip side of the coin, if I were ever bitten by someone else’s dog I would do my best to be as understanding as possible. My reaction would depend greatly on whether or not the owners did their best to socialize the dog and what they did in the way of management to prevent it from happening in the first place. The same would apply if it happened to my child. I have to say though that if anyone was bent on trying to pin a bite on my kid for doing what kids do while excusing the dog for doing what dogs do, my tolerance wouldn’t be very great at all. I’d make sure the people knew better before everything was said and done, even if I had to drag it out into court. That’s saying a lot because I’m not a sue happy person.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

The fact that the dog knew your seven year old brother may have had something to do with the fact that he only got a minor bite. 

What I was asking is if a brat came into a home uninvited as I and my brothers and sister did, met a dog we did not know, and got bit up for our tresspass, should the dog be expected to know and not bite kids? I really think not. 

Even at four and five years old we knew enough NOT to enter a house or property that had a formidable dog. 

I am not home right now. My Arwen is loose in my home. If a ten year old kid comes into my home and she bites him, my dog will not be euthanized. If the kid needs 100 stitches to repair his face, arms and legs, my dog will not be euthanized. 

There is a point where I need to control my dog, and a point where a parent or guardian needs to control their charge. The dog can't check the age on an id card and shouldn't be expected to. 

As for crating dogs when you are not there to protect the dogs from the burglars, well, you have to do what you feel is right. I heard of a group of people going into a house and torturing to death the puppies in the house. I think that dogs in crates are easy targets for villians. True most burglars hear the barking and find another residence to victimize. Someone who comes in with a gun and is not afraid to use it might just do so to shut the animal up. The only thing you got going for you, if you have neighbors close enough to hear a gunshot (which I really do not), is that a gunshot is more likely to draw attention than a barking dog. But people who rob houses are not nice guys. I personally wouldn't want to leave my dog gift wrapped for them.


----------



## Cooper&me (Dec 18, 2007)

Kids are just so unpredictable. I was just out side when a little girl out of no where hit my 60 pound puppy on the head. 

The mother was appalled and admonished the 8 yr old. Her reasoning was the pup sniffed her carrot. Never saw that coming!

It really bothered Quincy. He wanted away from her immediately.

I agree with the grandfather of the VICTIM! If any of my dogs bite a child and break the skin then I will euthenize. God forbid but children come first .


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

I agree if the kids are out and about in and around your home with you and your dogs. But if a kid came into your house unawares would you euthanize your dog if it bit them?


----------



## Papanapa (Mar 1, 2008)

I am going to weigh in on this one. I have kids and my kids have friends that are over our house constantly. Yes, I supervise my dogs when other kids are around. I would have to say that if my kids just nipped or bit someone I would probably not have them put to sleep. Over a 100 stitches on the face??? That's a different matter. I would have the dog put to sleep in a minute. A dog that would tear a kids face up like that doesn't seem very stable to me. Our Chessie (10 yrs old) doesn't like little kids very much. If he is in the yard and they are in the yard he stays clear of them. We are always there to supervise also. He has never attempted to bite a child though. He just runs the other way if he thinks they are too close to him. That is acceptable behavior, if he would chase one down and bite them he would be put to sleep too.

Controversial Idea:
Why does anyone need a dog for protection?? Get a gun.


----------



## melonyjhsn (Mar 8, 2007)

> Originally Posted By: selzerThe fact that the dog knew your seven year old brother may have had something to do with the fact that he only got a minor bite.


Maybe, maybe not. It could also be because the dog wasn't completely unfamiliar with him. It could have been the time of day, the direction of the wind, the phase of the moon, or the season of the year. Who can say for sure? Until we have a mind reading device for dogs we can only guess. I used this story as an example and in context with the original story about dogs living with neighborhood kids visiting their home. It also made a good example for a minor bite incident vs the more serious one that happened here. Things worked out in this situation because it wasn't a serious injury and both sides were able to reach an understanding in a civil manner. 



> Originally Posted By: selzerWhat I was asking is if a brat came into a home uninvited as I and my brothers and sister did, met a dog we did not know, and got bit up for our tresspass, should the dog be expected to know and not bite kids? I really think not.
> 
> Even at four and five years old we knew enough NOT to enter a house or property that had a formidable dog.


Times have changed so much that what a child knows varies so widely that it’s not even humorous. Common sense isn't common anymore and many parents don't spend time with their kids let alone teach them how they should behave or what happens in the real world. Turn the news on any given day and that much is pretty obvious. It's dangerous to assume any child truely knows better anymore. 



> Originally Posted By: selzerI am not home right now. My Arwen is loose in my home. If a ten year old kid comes into my home and she bites him, my dog will not be euthanized. If the kid needs 100 stitches to repair his face, arms and legs, my dog will not be euthanized.


I've read about Arwen on the boards and I happen to think she's a fine example of the breed and by the way you talk about her I'll bet she's one of your favorites. When incidents like this occur they tend to find their way into the court system and the choice isn't always left up to the owners on what happens to the dogs. I hope the choice would be yours to make.

For this dog in this case it’s in the best interest of the family to euth him IMO. A civil suit could wipe them out. Also from the tape it doesn’t look like they have a fence so they are going to have an issue keeping this dog away from children if they tried to keep him. No one is going to give this dog a third chance should he ever bite another child and they have children of their own living in the house. If it’s unreasonable to expect a dog not to bite any child whatsoever- is it then reasonable to turn around and expect a dog that has bitten to never do the same to children living in the home? 



> Originally Posted By: selzerThere is a point where I need to control my dog, and a point where a parent or guardian needs to control their charge. The dog can't check the age on an id card and shouldn't be expected to.


I really wish parents were more responsible with their children and I cheer when negligent parents go to jail for their stupidity. As adults though, we are responsible for other people’s kids that are in our lives whether we like it or not- hence the law suits when they get hurt on our property. 

I’d also be curious to know what the legal age is for trespassing. Does anyone know? 

Should dogs be expected to know better then to bite a child? I personally don't think so. I’ll say it again- supervision and containment. 



> Originally Posted By: selzerAs for crating dogs when you are not there to protect the dogs from the burglars, well, you have to do what you feel is right. I heard of a group of people going into a house and torturing to death the puppies in the house. I think that dogs in crates are easy targets for villians. True most burglars hear the barking and find another residence to victimize. Someone who comes in with a gun and is not afraid to use it might just do so to shut the animal up. The only thing you got going for you, if you have neighbors close enough to hear a gunshot (which I really do not), is that a gunshot is more likely to draw attention than a barking dog. But people who rob houses are not nice guys. I personally wouldn't want to leave my dog gift wrapped for them.


This is probably the only comment that I made that deserves the harsh criticism here and it doesn’t really apply to this story or topic. I’m not trying to say that I’m protecting them from burglars per say. My original thought was more along the lines of kids being kids and coming over when I wasn’t home. A locked door is as good a deterrent as a crate is in such cases.

There isn’t much more I can do then lock my dogs in my house when I leave home to protect them from anyone that’s out to hurt them. I don’t live my life in fear of what people might do to me though. I just do everything I can to make it as difficult as possible for the bad guys to succeed. Villains and whack jobs are interchangeable in this example and there’s not much you can do to really stop some one bent on causing another person this kind of pain. 

As for people breaking in- I too live off by myself and I know that a barking dog isn’t going to draw attention. Neither is a gun shot for that matter. Burglars in my case wouldn’t have a problem cleaning out the house without having to get any where near the dogs in their crates. They better wave on their way back out though…. Neighbor is a PI and the end of my driveway happens to be under surveillance!


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

I think that if you have kids, and neighborhood kids over your house all the time, your dog will be a lot less likely to bite and especially seriously bite a child walking in to your home. 

I have no kids and never have children over. So if a kid decides it will be fun to check out what is inside my house, my dogs would be much more likely to bite them. 

I rarely have anyone over my house, and Nobody just walks right in. My family seems to have a healthy respect for my choice in dogs, which is perfectly ok with me.


----------



## elginhaus (Jul 12, 2002)

Quote:I’d also be curious to know what the legal age is for trespassing. Does anyone know? 

Each state is different. In Texas legal age for prosecution of a child is 10 years old.


----------



## mwmr (Apr 8, 2006)

when I first started this thread I was just sharing what I thought was only current news concerning a german shepherd dog. Later, when I determined the identity of the dog I stated I would find out what happened and share that also. Here is what I understand now to have happened and the resolution.

I'm talking about a Grand Champion 4-h obedience champion 2x
(I know, not quite the same as Sch)
(Also the winner of several other shows locally entered)
Happy, well loved, the pride of a young teenaged boy's life
(A young man that worked an entire summer building fence and doing farm chores to take this puppy home and raise)
A dog that was fiercely loyal and proud of the family that raised him


The dogs, Keesha and Boomer, were always kept in the house and there was no children allowed playing in the house, only outside in the yard.
Although the boy says he was attacked outside the home, all of the blood was INSIDE the home.
The injuries the boy sustained were the result of ONE bite.

The lady owner is so grief stricken she is considering public speaking presentations to help educate people on keeping your pets responsibly secure and out of harms way. She doesn't blame the child, after all he's a child, in her words. She doesn't blame her dog, he did what dogs do, and she viewed her dogs as her children too, and feels somehow she's responsible and let down the kid and her dogs. Here I must say that all the kids knew they could play outside on the fun trampoline, but DO NOT go in the house. I stated earlier I know these people and this lady is an excellent mother and person and works hard to safeguard kids and pets.

Despite all that.........
Since the media was now starting to camp outside
Phone threats were increasing

A huge mess of pork chops were fried, the dogs loved chops, and after enjoying that treat, the dogs and the grownups went for a day to a county next door and found some place that was new to the dogs and owners alike and made a day of it in the woods
At home that evening after some pics and tears, an injection of a sedative preceded an injection to still the hearts of two wonderful dogs that were truly good and loved, but victims non the less.
I'm incredibly proud and happy to call these people my friends and to be able to know folks like these. I an very sad for their loss even though I am sure they did all that's possible to safeguard their dogs and the kids.


----------



## tibvixie101 (Nov 26, 2007)

they euthanized both dogs? Did the other dog have anything to do with the attack?

Im sorry but i have to disagree here, if the blood was in the house, then the kid was in the house. Sounds to me like the adults clearly forwarned the children to play outside only. Yes the dog should not have bit the child, but like others have posted before, at what point to dogs learn to bite only a certain age group? they dont! So if the child intruded on the dogs space, then i dont see why they were PTS. 

like really, how many dogs are their in shelters and rescues that have bites on their cards? not many i know, but they do exist and can be reabilitated. this case is just a mess.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

I do not even know if the dog needed rehabilitation. The dog was guarding the house. Some little intruder comes barging in and the dog lets fly with its teeth one time. Death!!!! One bite and you put down TWO dogs??? Are you kidding me???? 

The only real issue I can see is getting home insurance after the lawsuit. 

I am sorry, but I am shocked and saddened by this. The owner is right to say that she let down her dogs. She folded to the pressure of reporters that were camped there. Camped there for what??? One bite? I do not get it. All because one impassioned grandparent went to town with the newspaper.

We dog owners must pay close attention to this. It is always after some child gets mauled or killed by a pitt bull that people trot out breed specific legislation. If we are going to have a breed of dog that IS on many lists already, we have to be willing to fight to clear our dogs if they are not guilty. 

Biting a child that does not belong to a household, that comes into that household unannouced and uninvited should not be held against a dog that has the mentality of a two or three year old. How utterly rediculous in my opinion. 

When my nephew was seven years old, my mother caught him down in the landing with their English Setter. The kid had his hands clutching the poor dogs ears. The dog was shaking (his ears were always problematic). My mother recalled that the dog, who normally loved people would go and hide when this kid was there. Shortly after this incident, the kid's 5 month old puppy put a sizeable bite all over the kids face. I think he will be scarred. My brother and his wife still have the kid and the pup, partly because they do not know what the boy did to the pup to make it bite him. We are talking about a seven year old here. A seven year old is old enough to understand instructions, and old enough to irritate and even torture an animal and DESERVE to be bitten. And the kid in the incident was nine? What was he slow? 

Putting down two dogs because one child did an incredibly stupid thing is a crime. Some people should stick to owning gold fish. 

I played into all that crap about the day in the park and then the needles nicely. I hope the OP is happy. But I wouldn't call people that did this my friends, if everything went down the way that they said. Even if the dog flew out of the house and bit the child in the yard, why put down the second dog? How can you live with your dog for years and drop them like that? These people have children? Poor things.


----------



## longhairshepmom (Apr 7, 2003)

I can see why you are angry about the dogs death, but STILL. We weren't there and noone really know what exactly happend in that moment.

So what, the people told the kids not to come in the house. The people have children as well, who have friends over. Every watch a group of kids that age play? They don't "think" carefully about everything they do and can't be expected to. Thats why parents supervise.

IF I invite friends over so my daughter has someone to play with, and I'm not sure how my dog might react so some of them, guess what, its my responsibility to lock up that dog. I cannot expect some 9 year olds to be responsible enough to remember not to set one foot in the house, while they are there playing with my kids. How ridiculous is that anyway.

With rules like that, and such serious repercussions possibly if one child might have to use the toilet real bad and forgets the golden rule...crap, they set themself up for trouble. I do blame the owners. I would never allow other kids over and then not expect them to EVER set foot in the house, or risk that if they do (kids will be kids) they might have to pay for it with their face.

And if my dog produced such a vicious mauling, one bite or not, having that face half ripped off is a mauling, it would be dead. Sorry, if I can't trust my dog enough not to ripp off a friends of my daughters FACE for simply coming into the house, that pretty bad.

Of course a dog has no "ID" card, but no dog that lives in a normal/busy household with kids should be THAT aggressive and defensive, to go for the kill based on a kid entering.

I wouldn't even want a dog like that, I couldn't live with it that a child might have lost her life for the terrible crime or coming inside, perhaps to ask me something, to go to the bathroom or to simply say "hi"/

As to them doing all they possibly could to keep the dogs and kids safe.

They did what? They left the dogs loose in the house and they told the kids not to go inside the house. 

hm, what if a dog slipped out with one of the owners kids or got the door open? They trusted a bunch of small kids to mind that rule no matter what? 

Obviously they knew the dogs could be trouble or they wouldn't have even set up THAT rule. In that case there was a whole lot more they could have done to keep everyone safe.

But hindsight is always 20/20 and they paid for this dearly, so did the dogs and CERTAINLY the poor kid as well.


----------



## longhairshepmom (Apr 7, 2003)

> Originally Posted By: tibvixie101
> Im sorry but i have to disagree here, if the blood was in the house, then the kid was in the house. Sounds to me like the adults clearly forwarned the children to play outside only. Yes the dog should not have bit the child, but like others have posted before, at what point to dogs learn to bite only a certain age group? they dont! So if the child intruded on the dogs space, then i dont see why they were PTS.


The adults should know better that children (just like puppies) can't be trusted 100% with "rules".

The owners obviously already knew "something" about the dogs, to even have that rule. And they should have done more then simply tell the kids to stay out, to fullfill their role as supervising adults that have dangerous animals near children. 

Its like having a lion in a unlocked room and you tell some kids, don't go into that room.

Would you walk away, or would you first LOCK THE DOOR and then walk away?

And if you didn't lock it and a child was "stupid" enough to go in anyhow, would you say "to bad" I told him not to.

Its sad and tragic all around, but the owners were the adults here and in charge of both dogs and children (of whom neither can be trusted to follow rules to the t) There was just to much at stake for them not to have more safety measures in place, such as lock up the dogs while kids are running all over (after determining the dogs are bad with them)


----------



## Timber1 (May 19, 2007)

I tend to agree. But the most important thing is never, ever put your dog in a situation in which they could attack. The dog that did so much damage probably did not know the difference between a human and a deer, or a squirrel for that matter.


----------



## RubyTuesday (Jan 20, 2008)

Is it common for dogs to not know the difference b/w humans & wild life or b/w children & adults?

My crew clearly distinguishes b/w humans & other animals. They're also exceptionally reliable with people, & at their absolute best with children including infants, toddlers, grade school kids or adolescents.

As extraordinary, outstanding, brilliant, good & wonderful as they are (or were), I never considered their people skills to be vanishingly rare.

When my daughter was growing up, kids rolled through the house & yard 24/7. MyTribe varied from liking the kids to adoring them. All of them (cats included) were absolutely tolerant of kids regardless of how rough, noisy & hyper the kids got. Child friendly was a HUGE prerequisite to joining the family.

A neighbor's 4yo once let herself into my fenced yard, closing the gate behind her. She then walked into my attached kennel & again closed the gate. She went through both dog doors, across my small porch & into the house where she apparently wandered about for 2+hrs. Her panicked father was ready to call the police, but they looked around a final time & found her in the kennel surrounded by my 4 grinning monsters (2 Sibes, 2 Irish Wolfhounds). 

Sheeesh...Her dad actually told me it was a damned shame my dogs let her in the house without doing anything. Like what? Take her down??? Have her for lunch? Show the 4yo what rootin tootin tough hombres they were?

My extended family has always come in & out without knocking. Most of em have keys. I mildly discourage guarding behavior b/c too often innocent people get hurt & nice dogs die. As steady & reliable as they are, nobody will cross em just b/c they're big & look serious.

I like it that way. Realistically I'm almost as safe & my dogs are considerably safer than if they were guard/protection dogs.


----------



## lish91883 (Nov 2, 2006)

I can honestly say that if that was to happen in my house the result would be the same. With the exception of my mother who all my dogs know, no one can just walk into my house. If they do they are gauranteed at least one bite if not more. Especially if I am in the house. They cannot tell an adult from a child. And come **** or high water my dogs would NOT be destroyed. 

I knew better way before the age of nine, not to enter a house that had a dog with out someone from that family being with me.


----------



## cafrhe (Nov 4, 2002)

I was a little stunned by the news that the dogs had been put down too. But I read the article again and this sentence makes me think about it more:



> Quote: One of the boys who lived at the Cash house tried to stop the dog, Jakob said.


It sounds like one of the owner kids was there, so the boy who got bitten wasnt alone 'intruding' in the house. There is a lot we dont know, it is possible that the boy was invited in.

To me, this is similar (in this one aspect) to the Congo case. If my dog attacked someone when I was standing there (as in the Congo case) and didnt respond to me, I dont know if I could live with that dog. I think I would feel the same way if the dog didnt respond to my kids.

My dogs have always seemed to know the difference between 'puppies' and grownups. And I wouldnt have a dog who couldnt tolerate my children's friends in the house. Agression with strangers is one thing, with know people is another.


----------



## Timber1 (May 19, 2007)

Like you, my GSD is very friendly toward extended family and some of the neighbors. But if one of the neighbors kids, or a stranger walked into my house I hate to think what might happen.

How horrible, and I feel sorry for the poor kid. Nonetheless, I tend to agree with Selzer. German Shepherds are protective, and always will be. 

I suspect the purpose of your post was to bragg about how wonderful your dogs are, which is fine. However, terms like extraordinary, wonderful, brilliant, outstanding and good do little to address the issue at hand. 

It is fairly obvious you just wanted an opportunity to criticize the GSD breed.


----------



## arycrest (Feb 28, 2006)

> Originally Posted By: longhairshepmom...
> The owners obviously already knew "something" about the dogs, to even have that rule. And they should have done more then simply tell the kids to stay out, to fullfill their role as supervising adults that have dangerous animals near children.


I disagree with you assumption that the owners knew something about the dogs, IMHO it's just as likely that the owners could have been taking precautionary measures to avoid problems. 

My sister always had multiple dogs, Great Danes, Collies, GSDs, the majority had obedience titles. When her kids were growing up, none of the dogs had any problems with the neighborhood kids. But she still had a rule that none of her children's friends could come in the house when the dogs were out. PERIOD!!! No exceptions.


----------



## GSDolch (May 15, 2006)

The problem that I am having is that there are SO many details that are left out.

Some things that stand out to me,

1) the kid was invited onto the property, he was not intruding at all IMO

2) one of the kids that LIVED there was obvisouly with the boy and tried to stop the dog, so that makes me think he was then INVITED into the house or to the door or something...either way, the dog went after the child and pushed past someone to get to the child.

3) I dont think the owners did enough IMO and I do think that they might have thought something could happen. DO I know for certain? Nope, wasnt there and I dont know them..however I dont see inviting a child over to your house, saying to not go inside cause of the dog and then not do anything to keep it from something from happening.

If they even THOUGHT that this could happen then they should of had the dog some place where him and the kids wouldnt come into contact

It wasnt the dogs fault...and it was NOT the childs fault, he wasnt intruding, he was invited...heck he was the the boy that LIVED there.

But sorry, im with the crowd of people who thinks the dog should have been put down, if he can do it once like this to someone who is invited over there, then he can do it again to someone else who is invited over there and next time it might be more sever.



> Quote: But she still had a rule that none of her children's friends could come in the house when the dogs were out


This to me is also different, the key words im picking out are when the dogs were out...makes me lean towards thinking that she was always supervising or took whatever precations she felt was needed when kids were there and might come in the house.

Thats just what I get from it though.


For me, its as simple as this..it defeats the purpose of saying to not go inside the house and then someone that lives there invites someone into the house and then this happens. If they knew the dog was capable of this then MORE could have been done to prevent it instead of just saying 'oh dont go inside ok?'


----------



## RubyTuesday (Jan 20, 2008)

Timber, you're mistaken. 2 of my current dogs are GSDs. They're terrific...overall easier than Sibes (much more biddable). They were both bred & raised to be very, very reliable with people. In my situation that's important. I live in a congested, high crime urban area. Dogs that are appropriately aggressive in other environments can become too protective, territorial or suspicious in such a busy, hectic neighborhood.

People can certainly choose & raise dogs that are more protective, but their responsibilities also increase.

The wonderful awesome terrific stuff was intended tongue in cheek, ie we all think our kids/dogs are the ultimate greatest. In my experience, most dogs distinguish b/w humans & other animals, dogs & other animals, domestic & wild creatures, children & adults, healthy & infirm. Perhaps my experiences have been too narrow & that's atypical which is why I asked.


----------



## RubyTuesday (Jan 20, 2008)

> Quote:The problem that I am having is that there are SO many details that are left out.


I agree. It's frustrating how much has been left unanswered. Why were both dogs PTS? Was the boy known to the family? Did he frequently play there? Was he a friend of the owner's child? Had he previously interacted with the dog? Was there anything in the dogs' past behavior that hinted at trouble? What triggered the attack?

The boy is probably telling the truth about being bitten as he put his shoes on. That would explain the face bite. (Although face bites are notoriously common with young children). The extent of the injuries could also be due to his youth. The delicate skin of children & elderly people is more easily torn. Fortunately, (if such a word can be used in this context!), children often heal remarkably well. With a bit of luck, & medical ingenuity, he might have very little permanent scarring. 

It's a damned shame for the dogs' their owners & the boy. There are no winners in this one. Unless gross negligence can be shown I hope the child's family does not elect to sue. Apparently some things were done badly but it's a classic case of 'hind sight is 20-20'.


----------



## Timber1 (May 19, 2007)

If I am mistaken, I apologize, but I don't think you mnetioned GSD's in your original reply.


As for the last paragraph, yes, we all think veryhighly of our dogs. I will tell you I do a bit of rescue work, and there is only one large breed dog I ever met, that I would trust 100 percent around children. 

It only takes one incident for bad things to happen.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

I also think that anyone on this board who would put a dog down because it is dangerous or because of what might happen, they might as well go get their dogs euthanized today. Yep, even RubyTuesday. 

Our dogs are dangerous. Have you looked closely at the size of their teeth and mouths. They CAN kill a nine year old child or a three year old child. Any one of them. 

There are those of you who will rightly proclaim that your dog is good with kids and would never. But that doesn't mean that he can't. Under the right set of circumstances any one of our dogs may deliver a serious bite to someone who is not committing a crime. 

My parents' dog Cujo was recently diagnosed with epilepsy. He had some major siezures. After the first one he was so disoriented and scared that he growled at my Mother. My mother is the one with the special bond with him. He also tried to attack Pippy. They had to put Pippy downstairs until he was right again. They had no warning that the dog was going to have a seizure. If my sister's babies were over, he may have attacked one. Should we put him down?

There are a bunch of other reasons a dog might attack. A dog may bite if he is startled or injured. He may bite if he has a serious noise problem (like fireworks or thunder). He may bite if he feels his person or his people's property needs to be protected. 

All of our dogs are dangerous. It is up to us to keep our animals and children safe. 

Most good dogs who are familiar with babies will not attack babies up to a certain age. So I am not surprised the four year old was not attacked. A nine year old does not have a puppy-license though. 

If the people who lived there's child, was there at the time of the attack, why is there a question about whether the child was inside or outside? In this case, it sounds like the owners were plain scared of the powerful (or dangerous if you like) dogs they owned and the possibilities and decided to put them both down. 

If the dog actually stopped after only one bite, the dog was not really a red-zone dog. He made a spit decision that cost him his life. The chances are, the owner's child did not read the situation and give the dog a command quick enough. You cannot expect a kid to be able to do this. It sounds like the dog did stop when the kid did try to stop him if there was only one bite. 

If there was six or seven bites, I agree, that dog got to go (PTS). If there was one serious bite, I do not know. 

Only if both dogs were involved though, should both dogs have been PTS. That is my opinion.


----------



## RubyTuesday (Jan 20, 2008)

Timber, I mentioned the breeds in my post b/c they weren't GSDs & this is a GSD board. I wanted to avoid mistaken assumptions. I wasn't implying anything good or bad about particular breeds. 

Sam, my 9yo GSD, is exceptionally good with others, including dogs, people & parrots. However, I acquired her as an adult, & after my own child was grown, so I no longer have kidlings rolling through 24/7. My GSD pup is a pup (born in Dec). It's impossible to ascribe adult behavior to a young pup. He appears to have an excellent temperament, but it's neither honest nor wise to assume a kid safe pup will be the same as an adult.

IF, Allah forbid, he isn't, that will have to be managed, which won't be difficult b/c there are no longer kids in residence. To a near certainty it could be managed without euthanasia.

I avoid judging those who have made the agonizing decision to have their dog(s) PTS. It's impossible to know their dogs or their situation. I firmly believe it s/b the last choice, not the 1st. Risks s/b identified, acknowledged, minimized & managed. They can't be eliminated. 

That is as true of dogs as anything, one difference being that <u>family</u> dogs represent a miniscule risk. _Back yard dogs_ are not 'family dogs'. Sadly, 'back yard dogs' represent most of the danger without being distinguished from those who truly are family members.

This appears to be one of those rare cases that involved actual family dogs. The lack of information is frustrating in part b/c I'd like to understand & learn from it if possible. You're absolutely right. My dogs could also prove to be risky someday. A part of my responsibility towards them is to anticipate as much as possible, then utilize diligence, prevention & avoidance as needed.

My American Bulldog came with dominance aggression issues. Spanky was an (indirect) *inheritance*, not a plan. She was trustworthy with her 1st owner's grandkids, but I haven't yet *assumed* that's still the case. Perhaps I'll never feel comfortable in that assumption. She's aggressed at my daughter, myself, the cats & the muttchkins. Her issues with me (& my daughter) are almost fully resolved. She's largely cat re-habbed. The matter with the muttchkins still needs 'fixing' but I'm fairly confident it can be done. 

Euthanasia was never considered. Spanky can be aggressive, triggers easily & doesn't readily quit, but nothing suggests that she's vicious. She's damned smart, learns FAST, trains easily, is loving, fun & funny. As a dog, however flawed, Spanky is (considerably) better than I am as a human. While her behavior issues can't be ignored, having her PTS would be a crime. 

Good trainers/bahavioralists often state that very few dogs need to be PTS. Most can be re-habbed &/or managed. Sadly, following a serious injury, the possibility of ruinous litigation arises. Having the dog(s) PTS probably helps the owner(s) legal situation. Again, I'm not judging. Financial ruin, or becoming uninsurable, makes it impossible for most people to keep large dogs. The poor dogs would simply wind up PTS after the family was impoverished rather than before.

IMO, large scale education is needed. People, including dog lovers, too often poorly understand canine actions, language & motives. How often are fearful dogs proudly touted as *protective*? How often are dogs' fears considered a reasonable excuse for bad behavior? How often do people *assume* dogs are naturally good with children & safe with all family/friends? How often are people surprised that their sweet puppy is a very different adult? How many people don't know that dogs also go through infant, toddler, adolescent, teenage, young adult, mature adult & geriatric behavioral stages? How many don't realize hormones impact both their dogs & surrounding dogs way beyond simple lust? How many people never grasp that their dog(s) won't necessarily want what humans want? How many don't know that canine respect doesn't automatically follow doggie love? 

Unfortunately, the dog who's the subject of this thread is probably going to be simplistically labeled 'vicious' & quickly forgotten by all but his family & victim. What complex dynamics were at work, prior to & during, the attack? What is his extended history with family, friends & neighbors? Why were the injuries so extensive? Was it a single bite? Were there previous warning signs, either subtle or blatant? What was the role of the 2nd dog & why was s/he also PTS?

How quickly should dogs be PTS? How often is the decision driven by lawyers & litigation rather than community welfare? How can we better anticipate developing situations with our dogs?

Answers to these questions could help us better understand dogs in general, including those we love & live with.


----------



## Qyn (Jan 28, 2005)

I would think these people were under a lot of pressure from their community, or even in their own minds, as to what was the right thing to do .... for everyone's peace of mind.

Maybe they wanted the decision to be their's, rather than it be court directed. They may even have considered (with so much media attention) there was a definite possibility that someone may poison or otherwise cause harm to their dogs.

I believe they made the right decision, as at least one dog, (despite any percieved provocation) has caused serious injury. It should, however, be noted that 100 stitches in a facial injury reconstruction is not always a significant number (in comparative terms) as, to preserve facial expression, many small stitches are needed relative to many other repairs, so they soon add up - not that I am in any way dismissing this injury. 

If there is any issue concerning dog agression, a secure containment system is a prerequisite when you are going to entertain or invite other otherwise welcome visitors. I do not know why both dogs were PTS unless there was an equal risk with the other dog.

It is a very sad situation and I wish it had never arisen for all concerned.


----------



## towtrip (Dec 12, 2003)

> Originally Posted By: tibvixie101they euthanized both dogs? Did the other dog have anything to do with the attack?
> 
> Im sorry but i have to disagree here, if the blood was in the house, then the kid was in the house. Sounds to me like the adults clearly forwarned the children to play outside only. Yes the dog should not have bit the child, but like others have posted before, at what point to dogs learn to bite only a certain age group? they dont! So if the child intruded on the dogs space, then i dont see why they were PTS.
> 
> like really, how many dogs are their in shelters and rescues that have bites on their cards? not many i know, but they do exist and can be reabilitated. this case is just a mess.


So, are you volunteering to "rehabilitate" the next German shepherd that bites a kid?

Sorry, but you just hit a nerve here. There's always a public outcry about a dog with a bite history "not getting a chance" because "somebody" can "rehabilitate" him/her. But, when the rubber hits the road, that "somebody" is in reality "somebody else." I never see hands raised to say, "Don't euthanize that dog because *I* will take him and rehabilitate him and accept the liability and the risk of losing my homeowners insurance!"


----------



## RubyTuesday (Jan 20, 2008)

> Quote:It should, however, be noted that 100 stitches in a facial injury reconstruction is not always a significant number (in comparative terms) as, to preserve facial expression, many small stitches are needed relative to many other repairs, so they soon add up


That's an excellent piece of info. This rather sketchy story has many missing details. It's impossible to know if the extent of the injuries, was in part just bad luck, or due to the 'savagery' of the attack. IMO, it's impossible to condemn the actions of the owner or the victim with so little known. This is true of that poor dog as well.

I love large, powerful dogs, but even minor mishaps with them can have serious consequences.


----------



## Timber1 (May 19, 2007)

Susan, I am a little suprised at your response. Tomorrow morning I am getting a rescue dog that is described as aggressive and possibly bitten. She is actually coming from a rescue group you are aware of. A three year old female German Shepherd, described as OK toward other dogs, but aggressive toward humans.

Frankly, dealing with rescue if the dog is initially aggressive and even bites me, we will work through that.

This dog never bit a kid, but was described as aggressive. In my case I have raised my hand and will try and do my best. Would I do the same thing if a dog bit a kid, you bet.

I am really disappointed concerning your response because I firmly believe most dogs can be re-habbed.


----------



## towtrip (Dec 12, 2003)

Timber,

I agree that most dogs can be rehabbed, if their owners are willing to invest the time, effort and money to do so. 

However, if rescue groups took in all of the dogs that need rehabilitation for aggression issues, there would be no room for the dogs that don't have those issues. So, it leads to a situation where the "bad boys" are getting out of the pound and the "good boys" are being put down. That hardly seems fair.

In addition, there are few people who are truly equipped to properly rehabilitate an aggressive dog. Just look at the Aggression forum on this board. It's fraught with people who believe that you can just slap a shock collar on the dog and zap it when it's misbehaving. IMHO, that doesn't rehab the dog.

The other problem is the liability for the rescue organization. If the rescue group places a dog with a known bite history into a home, and someone gets hurt, the liability will come back onto the rescue group. I can't put my group at risk for that.

That being said, I never trust a shelter worker or the information on an owner-surrender form to label a dog "aggressive." To me, that word means very little. I tell them to describe to me the behavior and we will determine whether we want to take the dog. Often times, the behavior is barrier frustration or herding behavior and not aggression. However, once in foster care, if the dog exhibits a willingness to bite a human, we do not adopt it out.

In addition, in the time it takes to "rehab" one nutcase, there are four behaviorally stable dogs dying as result. Isn't the greater good served by saving four dogs that have a greater probability of being a joy to their family than one rehabbed aggressive dog that will continually be a source of vigilance and stress for its family?

We try to have one or two "project dogs" in our program at any given time, but we draw the line at biters. Dogs that are pathologically shy, undersocialized dogs, dogs on death's door from emaciation, etc., are far too plentiful, and stand the greater chance of being adoptable at the end of their rehabilitation.

The fact is that many people who have failed their dog by not providing proper foundation training and has ended up with a dog that injures a person thinks that they can salve their conscience by giving the dog to a rescue organization, insteading of stepping up to the plate and either rehabbing the dog themselves or being with their pet as it dies from a lethal injection. I can't begin to tell you how many e-mails we receive with the phrase, "he just needs a home that doesn't have ...." 

When all of the great, sweet, well-behaved dogs are being adopted from the shelters and no longer need our foster space, THEN we will look at our business model to see if we want to go into the rehabilitation business.


----------



## ILGHAUS (Nov 25, 2002)

With as many dogs as I've owned I don't believe I have had any that I had to fear for a child's safety in walking into my home under any circumstances. Of course I'm not going to put it to the test so I guess you can say most of this is just my opinion. 

Personally I would judge a dog that bit a baby or child a lot harsher than if it bit an adult. And the type of bite would influence my decision on the dog. A one snap no mark, one bite that inflected some damage (broken skin/ small amount of blood), vrs. a major bite vrs. multiple bites are quite different to me. 

And to the point of working with aggressive dogs, I agree with Susan when it comes to a major concern on insurance issues and if a person wanting to rehab such a dog can do so without putting other people in any danger.


----------



## longhairshepmom (Apr 7, 2003)

What many people don't THINK about is this..

Even if THEY are willing to take on that aggressive dog, a dog with a bite history, to try and rehabilitate him...even IF they are willing to take a bite in order to save the dog. Even IF they think its worth is despite many other dogs that have never shown aggression are being put to sleep and a few could be rescued in the time it takes to rehab an aggressive one, do they realize that they don't only put themself at risk??

I could never live with myself if I volunteered to take on this aggressive dog and rehab it, only for it to somehow get into a situation where it hurts someone else seriously. It only takes a split second. Someone could walk in (family / friends) a door could be left open a second to long. No matter how careful, there are no guarantees you won't slip up one time. And that one time might be all it takes.

And what about that rehabbed dog being placed? Who's to know if the stress of yet another home won't one day set that dog off again? Or some memory? Some distant association?

What if that dog then looses it and causes serious harm or death? 

SURE , that can happen with any dogs, one could say. But sorry, the chances with an already aggressive dog with bite history are far, far higher.

Rescuers of such dogs might be noble. But they do not only risk their health and life in doing so, sorry. They risk the health and life of ANYONE that might come into contact with that dog throughout its lifetime. 

Again, any dog can turn. But the chances with one that already has at one point, are far higher. And I wouldn't want that on my conscience. Its one thing to risk myself, but I refuse to risk some innocent other.

Its the cold hard truth, but there are FAR to many sweet tempered dogs being put to sleep every single day, to take on the bite cases. I know its not fair, it is sad, instead. And hopefully one day through lobbying and change, we won't have those numbers of dogs needing rescue, and we can put all our energy in the few that do. Incl. the ones that need really serious rehab. 

But even then, a dog with aggression issues and bite history is imho to big of a risk, to anyone around it at any time of its life.

just imho.


----------



## Timber1 (May 19, 2007)

Susan, needles to say I appreciate your response.

Just a few notes. So many of the dogs I meet that are labelled as aggressive might be a bit defensive, but are hardly violent. I always thought that once I got involved with a rescue group, there would be some leeway if they had an aggressive dog. But I am finding they lean heavily toward the shy ones.

Can I properly rehab an aggressive rescue dog. I think so, but have absolutely no idea, but as mentioned above my group has tended to over state how aggressive these dogs really are.

As for liability, I have no idea; opps I do After working for the US Treasury for 33 years, there are ways such as incorporating your efforts on behalf of the dogs, to avoid personal responsibility.

"If my foster bites me, I will continue to work with the dog. And would never hold my rescue group responsible. 

I wouild never describe any dog "as a nut case". A bit idealistic, but until I have a bad experience with a dog you refer to as a nut case, I will continue to ask for the so called biters.

I do agree with you that there are tons of dogs in shelters that are gentle, nice and hopefully adoptable. My last rescue, Sheba, was so gentle I could never understand why she ended up with our rescue group. She has been adopted into what I think is a wonderfull situation. 

As for going into the rehab business, my hunch is so many of the dogs labelled as violent, are not.

Being a novice,perhaps I will change my mind, but for now I am happy to accept a dog that some say is violent.


----------



## ILGHAUS (Nov 25, 2002)

> Quote:Being a novice,perhaps I will change my mind,


I'm just curious on this point which you bring up. I myself have never owned or worked with a person reactive dog and so when I am asked for advice on how to work with them I bow out. 

Through the years I've dealt with many dogs and some had issues with other animals but never people. I've been involved somewhat with rescue (very limited fostering) for about 6-7 years and so in some areas of rescue I am quite the novice. 

So to get to my first statement, I am curious. You say your rescue gave you a dog they consider aggressive and you say you are a novice. Do you mean a novice such as to reactive dogs, a novice like you have only fostered one or two dogs, or a novice as in new to rescue? Also I have no idea of your previous experience with working with dogs so as far as I know you may have had many years of this type of thing. Why would the rescue you are with turn such a dog over to a "novice" if they really believed it to be aggressive and a possible threat. Again, I'm just very curious. 

Oh another point I have a question about


> Quote: are ways such as incorporating your efforts on behalf of the dogs, to avoid personal responsibility.


How would someone go about doing this?


----------



## melonyjhsn (Mar 8, 2007)

Timber- That’s a well thought out response and most behaviorist’s would agree with you. A very small percentage of bite cases are serious ‘pathological’ biters. 

I’m with the girls that rescues shouldn’t take in biters- period. Your statement about avoiding personal liability just goes to show how seriously unbalanced the whole idea of rescue can get. Let’s say you do rehab a dog with a known bite record. You spend months working on this one dog and you get to the point where the dog is ’rehabilitiated’. The rescue then rehomes said dog and the worst happens. Now the rescue’s reputation is on the line and they will likely be dragged through the mud by the media. They are also in hot water with their adopter and yet another new dog bite victim. An incorporated rescue group might escape legal suits against any one individual in the group but the adopters are not going to have that same protection. You’ve now just put their butts on the line and they could loose all that they have spent a life time working for. Would that bother you? What would you say to the victim that was bit? Sorry… Tough luck?

I don’t think that all biters should be euthed or anything. It’s the responsibility of the owners to find a way to help their dogs after a bite while keeping the public safe at the same time. If they can’t do that then it’s kinder to euth them. At least the dog will have some comfort and peace in it’s final days. 

The only other option for a bite case is to find a responsible dog owner that’s willing to take on the burden of that dog for the rest of the dog’s life. Even this isn’t the best solution as it can still come back on the original owners if the dog bites again.


----------



## RubyTuesday (Jan 20, 2008)

What is meant by 'aggressive'? There are different types & degrees of 'aggression'. Nor are all bites equal. They can range from no contact warning snaps to full bore attacks with serious follow through. 

Countless people have told me how a dog 'tried to bite them'. Dogs rarely *try* to bite & fail. These claims are (IMO) a classic case of people failing to grasp even the rudiments of canine communication...(but we're the smarter species!)

My American Bulldog came with dominant aggression issues. She's certainly not red zone...not extreme & is both smart & ultimately biddable. She requires more diligence than my other dogs & has to be managed somewhat differently but she's not an especially tough case. 

She's so different from my other dogs. She's helped me to be both smarter & better. 

Because of her issues, I'd be hesitant to place her with rescue or another family. Handled badly & the poor girl could easily wind up dead, especially since she's often mistaken for a Pit Bull.

Tastes vary, but I'll take dominance aggression over fear aggression any day. I think it's easier to handle & less risky. I prefer dominance aggression to severe shyness or dogs that badly lack confidence. My household can overwhelm dogs that lack a bit of attitude, that don't have some chutzpah. This assumes the dogs are mentally sound & sane.


----------



## lish91883 (Nov 2, 2006)

> Originally Posted By: Susan F
> 
> So, are you volunteering to "rehabilitate" the next German shepherd that bites a kid?
> 
> Sorry, but you just hit a nerve here. There's always a public outcry about a dog with a bite history "not getting a chance" because "somebody" can "rehabilitate" him/her. But, when the rubber hits the road, that "somebody" is in reality "somebody else." I never see hands raised to say, "Don't euthanize that dog because *I* will take him and rehabilitate him and accept the liability and the risk of losing my homeowners insurance!"


I actually did take one of those dogs. And he still lives with me after years. So yes there are some of us out there. Once I have room to foster again, I wouldn't hesitate to do it again. Just because a dog bites does NOT make him a bad dog. It depends on the situtaion the dog was in. If a dog has teeth it can bite. No matter how sweet and nice. Given the right situtation any dog will bite.


----------



## lish91883 (Nov 2, 2006)

> Originally Posted By: Susan FTimber,
> 
> In addition, there are few people who are truly equipped to properly rehabilitate an aggressive dog. Just look at the Aggression forum on this board. It's fraught with people who believe that you can just slap a shock collar on the dog and zap it when it's misbehaving. IMHO, that doesn't rehab the dog.


Well since I am one of the people you refer, I'll answer this one. An E-collar can rehab a dog. I have several very successful stories. Blue included. And just as a side note, he does NOT wear his collar at all times, and still he does not attack the other dogs. Thats not rehabbing him? Then what would you call it? Just because I didn't use treats and praise? Attitudes like this make me see red. Maybe if people weren't so closed off to the E-collar, maybe less dogs would end up in shelters or PTS.


----------



## Dohhhhh (May 1, 2006)

> Originally Posted By: Susan F
> So, are you volunteering to "rehabilitate" the next German shepherd that bites a kid?
> 
> Sorry, but you just hit a nerve here. There's always a public outcry about a dog with a bite history "not getting a chance" because "somebody" can "rehabilitate" him/her. But, when the rubber hits the road, that "somebody" is in reality "somebody else." I never see hands raised to say, "Don't euthanize that dog because *I* will take him and rehabilitate him and accept the liability and the risk of losing my homeowners insurance!"


*Beg to differ Susan. I did. Meet Reno>>>>>>>>>>>*












I took this dog an hour before he was scheduled to be euthanized for sending a kid to the hospital. Along with his bite history, he came with dog aggression.

Was it an easy road to rehab him. No! It took about 6 months of daily dedication. Did I do it? YES! Three and a half years later, no bites. He is a company demo dog that is around hundreds of people and animals every year. Below is Reno and Carlie at a huge animal shelter event representing our dog training company.










I also noticed in another of your posts that you have a poor opinion of using an e-collar. I am sorry that you misunderstand how a good e-collar trainer CAN IN DEED "REHAB" an aggressive dog......not just "slap on the collar and shock it for misbehaving." Again, I am sorry to say that what I accomplished and maintained with this dog could not have happened with clickers or treats.

Reno is just one of *"my"* success stories with an aggressive dog and e-collar training. 

Below is Reno and the rest of my pack.


----------



## towtrip (Dec 12, 2003)

> Originally Posted By: lish91883And just as a side note, he does NOT wear his collar at all times, and still he does not attack the other dogs.


We're not talking about dog-aggressive dogs here ... this is about people-reactive dogs. I wouldn't trust a people-reactive that has supposedly been "rehabbed" with a shock collar. It's my personal opinion and I feel very, very strongly about it.


----------



## towtrip (Dec 12, 2003)

> Quote:As for liability, I have no idea; opps I do After working for the US Treasury for 33 years, there are ways such as incorporating your efforts on behalf of the dogs, to avoid personal responsibility.


This isn't about avoiding personal responsibility, it's about ensuring that the business, Echo Dogs, can continue to exist. Yes, it is incorporated, but also thinly capitalized. One liability lawsuit will put it out of business.

In addition, incorporation doesn't necessarily protect the individual, if that individual had knowledge about the propensity of a dog to harm a person and failed to adequately disclose the information to the new owners.

Rescued dogs already get a bad rap. Most people in the general public think that they're "defective" anyway. So, I consider each adopted dog to be an ambassador for our group, for the breed and for rescued dogs as a whole. I just think it's bad practice to adopt out known biters.

Can they be rehabbed? Most often, yes. But also realize that with a transition, there is always backsliding on any behavior that was worked on in foster care. In the case of a biter, that backsliding can send your adopter to the hospital, into court and injure the name of the rescue, the German shepherd breed, and the image of all rescued dogs.

So, if a biter is going to be rehabilitated, it has to be done by its owners. It's really not the province of the rescue organization (unless its some place like Best Friends that has a sanctuary where they can keep dogs for years and work on issues).


----------



## lish91883 (Nov 2, 2006)

> Originally Posted By: Susan F We're not talking about dog-aggressive dogs here ... this is about people-reactive dogs. I wouldn't trust a people-reactive that has supposedly been "rehabbed" with a shock collar. It's my personal opinion and I feel very, very strongly about it.


I understand that. I was replying to this....


> Originally Posted By: Susan F
> In addition, there are few people who are truly equipped to properly rehabilitate an aggressive dog. Just look at the Aggression forum on this board. It's fraught with people who believe that you can just slap a shock collar on the dog and zap it when it's misbehaving. IMHO, that doesn't rehab the dog.


My point is a dog CAN be rehabbed with a collar when the collar is in the right hands. Whether the aggression is dog or people. As a trainer I have handled both. And no offense I would trust an dog rehabbed with an E-collar before I would one that has been rehabbed by treats and praise. It's my personal opinion and I feel very, very strongly about it.


----------



## towtrip (Dec 12, 2003)

> Originally Posted By: lish91883My point is a dog CAN be rehabbed with a collar when the collar is in the right hands. Whether the aggression is dog or people. As a trainer I have handled both. And no offense I would trust an dog rehabbed with an E-collar before I would one that has been rehabbed by treats and praise. It's my personal opinion and I feel very, very strongly about it.


And would you then feel comfortable enough to place that dog into a stranger's home where you no longer have any control over how he's managed? That is what people are asking rescue groups to do when they beg us to take their biters and "find them a good home." 

Again, our experience is that every dog that transitions will backslide a bit on their behavior. They rarely go back to ground zero, but they will backslide for about 2 weeks and then come around again.

I have no data on how dogs rehabbed on shock collars perform when they transition to a new home because we don't use them. We have had several dogs in our program that we have had to rehab from being abused with shock collars, but they weren't biters.


----------



## Timber1 (May 19, 2007)

Paris, the dog that was described by the shelter as mean/aggressive toward humans showed up about noon today.

The rescue dog is just fine, and I have not changed my opinion that German Shepherds are just big babies.

Yes, I am a novice when it comes to rescuing German Shepherds, and this dog could have easily been put to death. Someone asked me why I feel I am a novice and included were a few questions.

To that person you are right across the board, but for whatever reason my rescue group feels I can handle more aggressive dogs, and I do not disagree.

Susan mentioned one thing that I take very seriously. Most of the dogs coming from shelters might be a bit upset about their situation. But in my opinion they should never be considered mean or aggressive. Generally, they are shy and fearful, regardless of what the shelter said.

As for the financial issues and how to avoid substantial liability. Again, perhaps Susan touched on this but the key is Incorporate, keep your firm thinly capiltalized, and put the extra dollars somewhere else.

As for E Collars, shock the crap out of a dog, and obviously it will obey.

They may be quick and efficient, but the dog will never bond closely with the folks that advocate there use. 

Another word about my new rescue. "I have no idea why this dog was taged with the aggressive comment. Based on the background info she was actually taken to obedience classes, did well, and medically was well cared for. She is AKC registered, ad with that comes the phone number of her initial family. 

Suffice it to say I am considering calling the original owners and asking why they gave up the dog.


----------



## Timber1 (May 19, 2007)

Tracie,

I love your dogs and of course the pictures. And I will not elaborate on E-Collars, except as you know if impacts a different part of the dog's brain, and without exception makes the dog(s) more fearful.


----------



## kutzro357 (Jan 15, 2002)

> Originally Posted By: Timber1Tracie,
> 
> I love your dogs and of course the pictures. And I will not elaborate on E-Collars, except as you know if impacts a different part of the dog's brain, and without exception makes the dog(s) more fearful.


Really imagine that. No wonder half my electrician friends are so aggressive. Duh.


----------



## Dohhhhh (May 1, 2006)

> Originally Posted By: Timber1Tracie,
> 
> I love your dogs and of course the pictures. And I will not elaborate on E-Collars, except as you know if impacts a different part of the dog's brain, and without exception makes the dog(s) more fearful.


Timber1 I would be more than happy to take any amount of time needed to read DOCUMENTED STUDIES that indicate and support/backup your above statement.

I have DOCUMENTED STUDIES that I believe prove otherwise should YOU like to take the time to read it


----------



## Dohhhhh (May 1, 2006)

> Originally Posted By: kutzro357
> 
> 
> > Originally Posted By: Timber1Tracie,
> ...


Thanks for the chuckle kutzro357 LOL Try not to bite anybody today ok LOL


----------



## Dohhhhh (May 1, 2006)

> Originally Posted By: Timber1
> As for E Collars, shock the crap out of a dog, and obviously it will obey.
> 
> They may be quick and efficient, but the dog will never bond closely with the folks that advocate there use.


Clearly you have no clue how good e-collar trainers use e-collars. Never have I had a dog so much as pass wind from the proper use of an e-collar much less actually crap from it.









The second comment is SO OFF BASE. Again, you have no clue what type of bond I have with my dogs and to try to explain it with the current mind set.........I would just as soon talk to the tree in the front yard.


----------



## Timber1 (May 19, 2007)

Just one question; do you have any idea what part of the brain a shock affects, say versus a tight jerk on a pronged collar.

I suspect you have no clue. 

Before insulting me do a bit of research.

I guess I am talking to you, but I might do better with a pet rock.


----------



## towtrip (Dec 12, 2003)

Tracie,

I would love to see the studies on shock collars. I'm not being sarcastic, just in case my tone doesn't come through in the post. 

I've challenged their use based on my education in physics, biochemistry, physiology, behavior and psychology. I have just never seen a peer-reviewed study supporting their use or substantiating the pathway by which they are effective. 

Please provide references. I really am interested.


----------



## Dohhhhh (May 1, 2006)

> Originally Posted By: Timber1Just one question; do you have any idea what part of the brain a shock affects, say versus a tight jerk on a pronged collar.
> 
> I suspect you have no clue.
> 
> ...


Show this pet rock your study PLEASE....you've been asked before but none have been forthcoming


----------



## Dohhhhh (May 1, 2006)

> Originally Posted By: Susan FTracie,
> 
> I would love to see the studies on shock collars. I'm not being sarcastic, just in case my tone doesn't come through in the post.
> 
> ...


I am looking it up Susan







Your tone is fine


----------



## towtrip (Dec 12, 2003)

Tracie,

For studies supporting positive reinforcement training, please refer to <u>Applied Behavior and Training Volumes I, II and III </u>by Stephen Lindsay.

Lindsay's textbooks do a great job at pulling together studies from all over the world on behavior and learning in dogs.


----------



## Dohhhhh (May 1, 2006)

http://www.trainmypet.net/documents/white_paper.pdf


----------



## Dohhhhh (May 1, 2006)

> Originally Posted By: Susan FTracie,
> 
> For studies supporting positive reinforcement training, please refer to <u>Applied Behavior and Training Volumes I, II and III </u>by Stephen Lindsay.
> 
> Lindsay's textbooks do a great job at pulling together studies from all over the world on behavior and learning in dogs.


Thank you Susan, I will track them down and read them. I have an open mind







And love to learn.


----------



## kutzro357 (Jan 15, 2002)

> Originally Posted By: Timber1Just one question; do you have any idea what part of the brain a shock affects, say versus a tight jerk on a pronged collar.
> 
> I suspect you have no clue.
> 
> ...


Please enlighten those of us that don`t have our PHD`s. Hey if a very mild stimulation to the brain can help aggression and make a better happier obedient pet then I`m for it.
I have trained with about every kind of equipment there is over my 53 years and have had good results.


----------



## Dohhhhh (May 1, 2006)

Susan, this Mr Linsey you mention above is accredited to being contributory to the article that I posted for you to read (several times if I am reading the bibiography correctly)


----------



## towtrip (Dec 12, 2003)

Yes, but you really need to look at his book and the context in which he was cited in your article. He is also cited frequently in books written by Patricia McConnell, Jean Donaldson, Ian Dunbar and most positive-based behaviorists. They are also on the reading list for trainers seeking their CPDT, which requires a rejection of punishment-based training.

Lindsay does not really promote a position, he reports research. The books are dense, but they are all scientific based. He cites to research that has been published in peer-reviewed journals.

The article you posted is a paper written by and citing "research" conducted by the manufacturer of the devices. As I said in another post, and see no need to repeat it here, there is at the end of the article a warning against using the devices for dogs with aggression or phobia issues. 

I do understand that there are people who have had success with the devices and I think that a temperamentally "hard" dog can respond to them, but for a dog with aggression issues, fear issues or a soft temperament, I think they do much more harm than good.

I also think that they easily lend themselves to abuse. I think the average nimrod that buys one of them from Petco takes it home, slaps it on Fido, and cranks it up to the highest setting (after all, he wants IMMMEDIATE results!). The nimrod has no timing or consistency so the dog is getting jolted over and over without understanding why. Then the nimrod dumps the dog in the pound because "it's stupid" and we go pick up the pieces. 

I would like to read the 2003 research by Steiss. Lou Castle says it's "out for peer review," but that doesn't take 5 years.


----------



## Dohhhhh (May 1, 2006)

> Originally Posted By: Susan F
> 
> I also think that they easily lend themselves to abuse. I think the average nimrod that buys one of them from Petco takes it home, slaps it on Fido, and cranks it up to the highest setting (after all, he wants IMMMEDIATE results!). The nimrod has no timing or consistency so the dog is getting jolted over and over without understanding why. Then the nimrod dumps the dog in the pound because "it's stupid" and we go pick up the pieces.


I TOTALLY AGREE with what you have posted in the above paragraph. It is because of this so called nimrod (I prefer idiot LOL) that I feel the e-collar is getting such a negative wrap. In the right hands, the e-collar is a magnificent tool. These so called nimrods DO expect the dogs to get "suddenly smart" by putting the collar on. Anyone with half a brain knows it does not work that way. Instead of condemning the collar, condemn Petsmart for selling them to any Tom, **** or Harry. Our company WILL NOT sell a collar to anyone without training.

I intend to read the studies that you said I should. 

As for CPDT, I already knew their position on e-collars and found they were not the group for me though a couple of our trainers are members. I am currently working on a couple of training certs through IACP.


----------



## Timber1 (May 19, 2007)

I tend to think the use of an E-Collar does more harm then good, for specifically the reasons you and Susan stated.

And to think this post started because a kid got 100 stitches.

As for the studies regarding E Collars there is a wonderful behavior specialist that I hired to evaluate my dog. Her conclusions about the E Collar are much different then yours. However, I almost always get in trouble for posting/advertising someone else. One of her comments about the collar was the part of the brain it impacts.

Although a bit reluctant to do so, if you want her name send me a personal E Mail. 

As for my personal observations, even a tick creates fear in a dog's eyes. And I suspect with my rescue GSD's, who are shy to begin with, an E Collar would not help me rehab them.


----------



## shadow mum (Apr 8, 2008)

This is SSOOO sad. I think that the owners are to blame. I have had dogs from the time I was a small child, many different breeds, from Great Pyr,to Akita/Malamute to peke-a-poo to my GSD,with others thrown in. From the time I can remember, my dad drummed into me that you can never trust a dog completely, because they don't have reason, and no matter how well trained, can act on instinct. My GSD cross was a rescue, and the first dog I had after the birth of my kids. He was NEVER left alone in the room with the kids, and if people were visiting, he was kept on leash, at my side. My kids (7yrs and 5 yrs) have also been taught about dogs. They would never dream of running up to a strange dog. They stand out of range of the leash and ask for permission to pet the dog before approaching.

I only wish more people would take precautions, because when this happens, it's a tragedy for everyone involved.

Diane


----------

