Rotties Attack Yorkie

Anyone hear about the Rottie attack in the Seattle, Washington area today? I heard the last bit of the segment on the news. From what I heard the Rotties were tied in their yard, the Yorkie got loose from his owners and commited literal suicide by running up to the dogs who killed it. When the owners attempted to recover the body the dogs refused access (being guard dogs). The cops doused the dogs in mase to get the body.

Although the Rotties were properly tied and on the owner's property they have to be put put in isolation for 10 days and are labeled dangerous...? The news cast ended stated that the owners of the Rotts probobly face criminal charges for the Yorkies death but are responsible for what happened.

This is insane! What is up with this logic? The Yorkie's owners should have contained the dog. If it were a Rott who was killed by two other Rotts then #1 we would have never heard about this and #2 the owner of the dead dog wouldn't get anything for this. It would have been "vicious man-eater" killed by "vicious man eaters".

Whoops!

Whoops! Grammer error...

The news cast ended stating that the owners of the Rotts probobly will not face criminal charges for the Yorkies death but are financially responsible for what happened.

To follow this go to either www.q13.com (if anything gets posted) or http://www.ilovemydog.org/
Or just wait for me to rant

This is nuts! The poor Yorkie's handler should be put in jail for dog abuse

Chazhound

So....a Yorkie trespassed (if you would call it tresspassing) onto someone's house and than he got attacked by two Rotties. Now the rotties are in trouble and the owner of the Rotties will have to pay for the Yorkie.

This is absolutely ridiculous. Its awful that the Yorkie died but isn't it the owners fault for not having the dog properly secured. I think its the Yorkie's owner's fault. Don't blame the Rotties for doing their job of protecting their house.

That's messed up. It's like the lady who was attacked by an Irish Setter outside his yard while she was walking on the street. She killed the dog by throwing a rock at its head because it was biting her and her Sibe.
Well, the owners of the setter, who were OUTSIDE the whole time watching that, had a fit and sued her. They should have been watching their dog in the first place.

People need to be responsible about containing their animals, or the animals WILL get killed, whether it's by a person or another dog.

Just another example of a dog's owner thinking that her dog didn't need to follow rules or have any discipline.

Assuming there are leash and containment laws in Seattle, shouldn't the owner of the Yorkie be cited for flouting those? Leave the Rotties alone. They didn't do anything wrong - contained and on their own property.

The Rottie owners need to countersue to make that point and get their dogs off the "dangerous" list, or those dogs will be in jeopardy every single time someone walks down the street. They also need to put up a privacy fence to make it more difficult to get to the dogs, because, trust me, some idiots will be gunning for those dogs now, whether it's just tormenting them to the point that they do become dangerous or actually hurting them or poisoning them.

Well, here's another story of dogs not being disciplined. The guy across the road from the farm has two Lab mixes, a Yorkie and another dog that's either a very small Collie or a very large Sheltie. He lets them run loose all day and even at night (I hear them barking in our woods to the front and side of the house at 3:00 a.m.), and they've been getting increasingly aggressive, not to mention they're going to get killed chasing cars. They've even been aggressive toward our dogs, but, with the exception of the big male Lab mix finally making Bimmer angry, our dogs have just ignored them. The Lab is now terrified of Bimmer.

I think they've just learned that our pasture isn't the healthiest place for unfriendly dogs. I just heard lots of noise and barking and snarling, and called my dogs, then lots of yipping and squealing, and about two minutes later, my three sauntered in the front door, oh, so casually.

Something tells me that our cows aren't going to be chased for awhile! It's really a shame, because our dogs are normally happy to have friends come over and play and hunt together. All Danny's dogs had to do was play nice and not chase cows.

Lol Renee!

No information?

I haven't been able to find a thing. None of the news stations seem to care about the story but I've emailed them anyway. I want to know what happened. I heard from a friend that the dogs were already labeled aggressive so this is more a city problem.

Seattle's Dangerous Dog Law states that it only takes 3 annonymous complaints about your dog acting aggressively to get your dog taken away and euthanized. This is in an attempt to get around the breed laws but means if you piss off a neighbor, you're in trouble.

Their is a leash law in Seattle which is a good point to bring up.

Some people are just idiots, everyone assumes the little dogs can do no wrong but it's like I said in my email- to dogs size doesn't mean a dam* thing, it's whether the dog knows how to carry itself. To the Rotties, this was a threat to themselves and their property and they acted accordingly. May have been overkill, but dogs just don't think like people, if they did that Yorkie would have been smart enough to stay away.

Oh wow, I didn't know they could do that....anywhere in the US. Thats horrible. But how would they prove that the dog is being aggressive or do the cops just not care?

Typically, they just don't care. It's not a glamorous or exciting case, and people who complain about dogs tend to nag and nag and nag, making call after call, so the local authorities tend to want to just make the whole thing go away. Very few people have the funds it would take to hire a defense attorney for their dog in a case like this, and truthfully, there aren't many attorneys who would take a case like this. Someone really should, though. It raises all sorts of ground breaking legal questions, the foremost in my mind being does our judicial principle of "innocent until proven guilty" (theoretically) hold true even when the defendant is of another species? It seems to me that if it is a sound and admirable principle it should extend to any entity within the bounds of our judiciary.

Charley once had a similar potentially ugly problem here at the farm before I met him. Someone built a new house one field over and had a smaller dog - about 30-40 pounds. Charley's old dog, Odd Job, was aging and had lost a great deal of movement in his back legs. The neighbor dog kept coming over and harrassing Odd Job, until he got tired of it and bit the dog pretty seriously. The other owner called animal control and told them that a pack of Rottweilers had mauled his dog. Animal control came out to investigate and Charley showed them the "pack of Rottweilers." Elderly Odd Job came limping out, walked up to the officer, licked his hand and promptly lost the balance in his hindquarters and flopped down. So much for a murderous pack of Rotties! Of course, the neighbor still holds a grudge. Charley has enough of a reputation as a loose cannon from his boxing days that no one really wants to press anything - especially regarding his dogs!

And that news article..ladies and gentlemen..is a perfect example of why you should:

a) Never leave your dogs outside..guard dogs or not.. DOGS SHOULD NOT BE TIED UP ON CHAINS...you never know what your dog may be getting into when your eyes aren't there to watch over it...and why else?

"Chaining a dog creates an unnatural and unhealthy environment. Dogs require excercise, mental stimulation and social interaction with either other dogs or with the humans who aquired them. None of these requirements can be met living at the end of a chain." ( quoted from the following book: )

http://www.fataldogattacks.com/purchase.html

b) Always keep your dogs (this is regarding that yorkie) on a proper leash so they DON'T go charging up to animals that could probably kill them in a second

c) Tell people never to believe the media..they're good at making the little dogs look innocent, and the bigger ones monsterous and vicious killers.

...

You know that is really true around here.I have friends that have dogs (a cocker spaniel and a basset hound) and we use to walk our dogs in the park.Since because of the people (and mostly because of the pittbulls,the ones that I've told you about with bad owners) we,the owners of the other dogs are forced to keep them in 2 playgrounds for dogs that are a little small.One day we were walking in the park and the police officers told me to leave the park (even though my dog was on a leash) and to my friend to put her dog on a leash (the cocker spaniel had no leash on).I was so mad,not on my friend but on the fact that they told me to leave the park because I have a big dog and my friend that has a cocker just to put the leash on.Hellooooo,both of them can bite.I just think that it's unfair to treat the smaller dogs any different.Why?Because they are small?They can do the same damage.And you know what,my other friend that has a basset hound,her dog is very bad.This is also her fault because she didn't show him who is the boss.And now the dog is the master of the house.Anyway I just wanted to say about him that being a male and all he hates,but really hates other males.Especially rottweilers.And he is always the one who starts the fights.
Another thing: there are that hysterical owners with little dogs that when they see a bigger dog they imediately take them up in their arms and the dog feels protected and he starts barking at the other dog.
One day I was passing by with Amira on leash and a man was coming with a mix of Pekingese.When the dog saw Amira he nearly went crazy,started barking,was choking with the collar.The owner was just laughing that his "mighty killer" wanted to bite Amira.So I got angry and said to that man:"If he is so mean why don't you put him a muzzle on?".I don't know why he got upset.Obviously it was "something I said"
And another thing (this has nothing to do with little dogs): What's with every single mother or grandmother that says to their child whenever they see a big dog (I don't know if they say this about any dog or just when they see a big dog):"Look at that dog.How big he is.But don't go near him cause he will bite you."Or if a kid cries because of something I hear them say:"Stop crying or the dog will eat you".And so on and so on.I'm so angry.I mean what's a kid suppose to believe when he will grow up?He will definetely hate dogs,right?

Nicco, what can I say? It's all very unfair and maddening. I guess, though, we should be glad that these horrible owners of little dogs DO own small dogs - can you imagine what kind of owners they would be if they had big dogs?

[Sorry, been gone at fair so couldn't reply]

shredhead, the authorities don't care. They'd just as soon remove the problem that is wasting their time, ie remove the dog. Their are certain rules to the three strikes rule, the main one being the dog has to be behaving in a threatening manner and off the owner's property which brings us back to why the Rottie owners are punished. The dogs were on his property, not running loose in the neighborhood.

Seattle dog owners are working to overcome this but it's a long way off. As it stands people can call your dog in for anything, so long as they make it seem like the dog is a threat to people's (or animal's) safety.

I can't believe how aggressive those rotts would kill a yorkie. Can you imagine you getting killed by those two dogs. Ok the yorkie owner should of been more careful. Technically it's not the Rott's owners fault because the yorkie did transpass. Poor little yorkie.

Awe thats sad about the Yorkie. But it wasnt the owner of the rotts fault. They were tied so it was the Yorkie's owners fault.