Fight at the dog park

[ihartgonzo]

No matter the breed, if your dog will hurt another dog, they need to leave and NEVER come back!

Fozzie has not so much as showed his teeth to another dog. He has been treated badly and he has not retaliated... and if he did retaliate, I would not go to dog parks anymore. I don't care if the other dog "deserved it", because there are innumerable rude dogs that come in who may or may not deserve to be put in their place, but in my opinion NO dog "deserves" to be physically hurt by another to learn a leason. I think the only way to maintain even a little bit of order in a dog park is by never, ever bringing in dogs with any kind of bite history or propensity to bite. Even Gonzo, who can be a huge brat, has never hurt a hair on another dog's head - even while being attacked. Bite inhibition is so important, and bringing in dogs without that is bound to result in serious fights.

Recently, a very large, very unaltered, very tense Pit Bull was coming into the dog park. I saw him coming from a mile away, literally. He was very "on" and worked up as they walked in... it drew other dogs to the gate... and upon entering the gate (of course the owners did not even bother to wait a moment for other owners to get their dogs), another dog was being pushy and the Pit Bull lashed out at him. The other dog's mouth was bloody and the owner left. The Pit Bull owners (who also had a baby with them walking around... *le sigh*) were walking by us, and Fozzie was very uncomfortable with their dog, which they failed to do anything about. Fozzie growled because he wouldn't leave him be, and the Pit Bull owner said something about Fozz being mean/curse word/curse word. Me and my friend turned around and told them simply to get the F out - their dog HURT another dog - and he has no right to be here. We also mentioned that children under 5 years old are NOT ALLOWED, much less walking around, and that their baby could have easily been hurt in the fight that their dog caused. They tried to claim that their Pit Bull was only defending himself, and I asked them to please look at the sign in the front, which says "No Aggressive Dogs"... not "No Aggressive Dogs unless the other dog deserves it."

 

[BostonBanker]

Well, our dog park clearly states that no dog should be in the park unless the owner can control it at all times. If a sighthound is actually at risk of running down and damaging smaller dogs just because they are moving quickly, then it clearly does not meet this requirement

So if I walk in to the park with a steak dinner and sit on the ground in the middle of the park, I get to kick out every dog whose owner can't call it away? I used to use that example with the people at the "dog park" (not designated, but everyone used it as one) in the city where I used to do animal control. I would get joggers that would call in complaints about dogs mobbing them, which would then lead to dog owners complaining that the joggers shouldn't be running through a "dog park", which would lead to me explaining what "dogs may be off lead as long as they are under the owner's voice control at all times" means.

Personally, I'd blame both of them, and I also blame anyone who comes into a dog park with more than two dogs per adult handler. Our parks nearby actually allow 3 per adult, but I think if you can't grab each one of your dogs by a collar and drag them away if needed, then it is too many. Too many to keep an eye on, too many to control if a bad situation should arise.

 

[smkie]

I agree with the ratio of dogs to handler except for one thing. I have three, but Mary is so old she is of nor worry to anyone. In a situation like that i don't see where the ratio applies. IF i had a dog that was iffy i shouldn't be there in the first place let alone having my eyes glued to it. I would not want to have to leave one behind. It comes down to basic common sense. The owners i see that are the trouble are the ones that sit down with the newspaper or are running their mouths oblivious to what their dog is doing.

 

[Amstaffer]

That's so cute!

What a lot of us struggle with is that we don't live anywhere that there is space for dogs to run around other than dog parks (I live in the middle of a big city and don't even know anyone with a decent backyard). I stopped taking my dog for a while but we have gone a few times recently. Bailey adores other dogs and really likes time offleash to run around.

I live in the 19th largest city in the USA and there are always places to find if you look around. (Industrial parks, Cemeteries etc...) Even dog parks during down times. Try the dog park at 6am on Sunday morning

 

[PoodleMommy]

I have the same issue as Bailey... there is nowhere here to take dogs off lead except the dog parks or certain public parks after 9 pm.... literally nowhere.

 

[Pits&Pugs]

The negligence on both sides is pretty horrific:yikes:.....and I own both breeds.

 

[4dogs3cats]

The negligence on both sides is pretty horrific:yikes:.....and I own both breeds.

Hey! There you are! I even think the guy with small dogs had a pug! It was very horrific and a lot of people freaked out. Thankfully, I have learned enough to know how to have good luck breaking a fight up, and only one guy got his hand bit.

I am about to BLOW your MINDS when I post a picture in the next hour when I get home and upload it.

LITERALLY BLOW YOUR MINDS

 

[Romy]

Prey aggression isn't DA. Sighthounds won't necessarily kill a small dog. I've seen prey aggressive dogs who were perfectly able to know a dog from a prey animal. I wouldn't trust them anywhere near a rabbit or even a cat, but they were fine with dogs.

There ARE breeds that are more likely to be DA than others, and I wouldn't be comfortable bringing them to a dog park, but there are individual dogs within those breeds that aren't at all DA and could do fine in a dog park and there are plenty of dogs of other breeds that are DA.

There are plenty of sighthounds who are so "turned on" by the movement of a small dog that they simply cannot be trusted with them. If you don't believe me try looking at the "for adoption" page on a greyhound rescue site.

The point I am trying to make is that for just about every "pits and dog parks?" thread that comes up here on chaz, the general consensus is that it's irresponsible to bring a pit to the dog park regardless of the individual dog's history, because of the potential for dormant DA to be triggered under the right circumstances.

So how is that different that dormant prey drive getting triggered in a larger dog around a smaller dog? I have seen it happen. There was a tragic, and preventable incident locally at a training facility (not the one we go to) where a malamute killed a pom on the agility course. The mal had never, ever shown an ounce of dog aggression. He was one of those not good with cats dogs, but he'd shown no interest in small dogs as prey until that happened. I have also known borzoi who never showed any prey interest in small dogs and cats until after they matured. And what about dogs with the potential for same sex aggression?

 

[corgipower]

There are plenty of sighthounds who are so "turned on" by the movement of a small dog that they simply cannot be trusted with them. If you don't believe me try looking at the "for adoption" page on a greyhound rescue site.

That may very well be. It is certainly something that owners of sighthounds need to be aware of. And I never said otherwise. What I did say was that prey aggression is not the same as DA.

I have seen dogs with huge levels of prey aggression. Dogs that would kill anything small and furry. Dogs that could never be anywhere near a cat. Dogs that would eye a small dog as a prey object, who then were gradually introduced to small dogs and were able to learn that a small dog is in fact a dog.

Now, not all dogs are going to be able to switch off prey drive when a small dog is running around. But many of the ones I've seen absolutely can.

Again...prey drive and prey aggression is NOT dog aggression.

 

[Romy]

That may very well be. It is certainly something that owners of sighthounds need to be aware of. And I never said otherwise. What I did say was that prey aggression is not the same as DA.

I have seen dogs with huge levels of prey aggression. Dogs that would kill anything small and furry. Dogs that could never be anywhere near a cat. Dogs that would eye a small dog as a prey object, who then were gradually introduced to small dogs and were able to learn that a small dog is in fact a dog.

Now, not all dogs are going to be able to switch off prey drive when a small dog is running around. But many of the ones I've seen absolutely can.

Again...prey drive and prey aggression is NOT dog aggression.

I agree with you, and you're missing my point. I know they are not the same behaviors, but the end result is. Dead or maimed animals. My point is that when people are saying pits should never be brought to the dog park because of the potential for DA to be "activated" should by their logic also be including any other type of dog with instincts lying in wait to be "activated" by the right triggers, like something small running. But they don't for some reason, even though you hear of just as many incidents of larger dogs going after unprovoked small ones in a dog park setting.

 

[corgipower]

So how is that different that dormant prey drive getting triggered in a larger dog around a smaller dog? I have seen it happen. There was a tragic, and preventable incident locally at a training facility (not the one we go to) where a malamute killed a pom on the agility course. The mal had never, ever shown an ounce of dog aggression.

Well, maybe we should just disallow all big dogs in dog parks.

ANY dog can become aggressive. ANY dog can suddenly decide to kill a prey object. ANY dog can suddenly decide to defend himself from a perceived threat.

How was the incident you refer to preventable?
What do you suggest?

 

[Dekka]

as I said... there always had to be that first time....

 

[Romy]

Well, maybe we should just disallow all big dogs in dog parks.

ANY dog can become aggressive. ANY dog can suddenly decide to kill a prey object. ANY dog can suddenly decide to defend himself from a perceived threat.

How was the incident you refer to preventable?
What do you suggest?

Okay, let me try again.....

I agree with you, and you're missing my point. I know they are not the same behaviors, but the end result is. Dead or maimed animals. My point is that when people are saying pits should never be brought to the dog park because of the potential for DA to be "activated" should by their logic also be including any other type of dog with instincts lying in wait to be "activated" by the right triggers, like something small running. But they don't for some reason, even though you hear of just as many incidents of larger dogs going after unprovoked small ones in a dog park setting.
__________________

I DO AGREE WITH YOU. My argument was targeted towards those that argue that pits should not be in dog parks by merit of potential DA. Sheesh.

ETA:

How was the incident you refer to preventable?

Well, not allowing both dogs to play on the equipment together after class would have gone a loooong ways towards that pom still being alive.

 

[Izzy's Valkyrie]

We have a terrier (Norfolk?) owner at our DP who spends the entire time holding her dog and telling him to stop harassing anyone who looks at her other female dog. If you have to hold on to your dog the whole time, why bring him to a park? The two Bostons at our park are very well behaved so in general I blame poor ownership.

(Waiting for that mind blowing picture)

 

[corgipower]

I agree with you, and you're missing my point. I know they are not the same behaviors, but the end result is. Dead or maimed animals. My point is that when people are saying pits should never be brought to the dog park because of the potential for DA to be "activated" should by their logic also be including any other type of dog with instincts lying in wait to be "activated" by the right triggers, like something small running. But they don't for some reason, even though you hear of just as many incidents of larger dogs going after unprovoked small ones in a dog park setting.

Nope, I didn't miss your point. But I did want to clear up the fact that prey aggression is not DA. I know that and you might know that, but there are plenty of people who might read this thread and NOT know that.

I disagree with the idea of pits not being allowed at dog parks. Dogs like Amstaffer's deserve an opportunity to play just as much as any one else's. Besides, banning pits from dog parks is a form of BSL.

I also very much dislike dog parks in general - this being one main reason. There are too many irresponsible dog owners bringing dogs to them. Personally, I wouldn't object to the banning of dog parks.

Okay, let me try again.....

Yea, the post I'm replying to here was posted while I was writing my previous post. I didn't see it until after I posted.

sheesh

 

[Tahla9999]

There is a difference between a pit bull attacking a dog than most other breeds attacking a dog. BSL. This breed already has a very damage reputation, not to mention the media is crazy about finding any negative pit bull related news. Being that pit bulls are inherently DA, why risk going to a dog park which exposes the dogs to a situation that can spark their inner instincts and cause more negative press.

 

[corgipower]

Being that pit bulls are inherently DA, why risk going to a dog park which exposes the dogs to a situation that can spark their inner instincts and cause more negative press.

But if you have a pit bull that isn't DA, then why not take it to a dog park, which would also allow people to see a non-aggressive pittie.

Although, maybe we should round up a bunch of DA goldens and poodles and labs and let them in a dog park so the public can see that DA can come in any breed.

 

[Romy]

Nope, I didn't miss your point. But I did want to clear up the fact that prey aggression is not DA. I know that and you might know that, but there are plenty of people who might read this thread and NOT know that.

I disagree with the idea of pits not being allowed at dog parks. Dogs like Amstaffer's deserve an opportunity to play just as much as any one else's. Besides, banning pits from dog parks is a form of BSL.

I also very much dislike dog parks in general - this being one main reason. There are too many irresponsible dog owners bringing dogs to them. Personally, I wouldn't object to the banning of dog parks.

^^This is the point I was trying to make. Thank you for putting it so plainly, because my way was really roundabout and confusing.

 

[PoodleMommy]

Personally, I wouldn't object to the banning of dog parks.

But not everyone has access to fenced in backyards and other places to let their dogs off lead... for many dog parks are essential...thankfully they will never be banned here.

 

[dr2little]

But if you have a pit bull that isn't DA, then why not take it to a dog park, which would also allow people to see a non-aggressive pittie.

I think that you'll find that most pit owners will disagree with this. It's out of sheer love, understanding and the desire to protect their breed that many pit owners refuse to subject their dogs to chance. Go onto a pit forum and ask about dog park attendance. You may be surprised.

Although, maybe we should round up a bunch of DA goldens and poodles and labs and let them in a dog park so the public can see that DA can come in any breed.

There is a huge difference in the nature of the 'fight'. While a smarta$$ golden, poodle or lab may start a fight, a pit is much more capable and determined to finish it. No matter who starts it, the pit will always be blamed... Disgusting but true.