Bloody labrador

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
Flinders
Posts: 3023
Joined: 10 Mar 2009, 6:47pm

Re: Bloody labrador

Post by Flinders »

I always make a point of thanking dog owners who call their dog to them (successfully) or put it on a lead,or draw it to one side as I approach. And I always approach slowly and with warning, and unclip in case of problems.
But a few owners are inconsiderate and can't or won't control their dogs, and their dogs can still be dangerous even if they aren't aggressive. Those owners are the few who spoil it for the many. Sadly, that's the case in lots of aspects of life. I'd rather those owners had their dogs taken from them than that all dogs and owners were penalised by dogs always having to be on leads, which I can see happening in the not too distant future if something isn't done about the bad owners.

In my experience, a dog that is obedient to quiet commands is a happy, secure dog. Disobedient dogs are often insecure and anxious, as they don't know where they stand with their inconsistent but shouty owners; this makes the dog unhappy and can make them dangerous too.
There are lots of training classes out there for dogs and their owners, there's no excuse for having an out of control dog.
robing
Posts: 1359
Joined: 7 Sep 2014, 9:11am

Re: Bloody labrador

Post by robing »

pwa wrote:
robing wrote:All this amateur dog psychology is all very well, but we have a right to cycle without being chased by out of control dogs, no matter if they are being "friendly " or "wanting to play", end of. I do think however a good squirt of your water bottle would deter most dogs.


I don't think anyone is denying that dogs should be kept under reasonable control in public areas. But the "dog psychology" is useful if and when they aren't. I'm not sure about the water bottle ploy. I wouldn't try it with an angry dog.


It will work if you put some chili powder in it. Just need to remember not to drink it ;-)
Psamathe
Posts: 17650
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: Bloody labrador

Post by Psamathe »

Flinders wrote:I always make a point of thanking dog owners who call their dog to them (successfully) or put it on a lead,or draw it to one side as I approach. And I always approach slowly and with warning, and unclip in case of problems.
But a few owners are inconsiderate and can't or won't control their dogs, and their dogs can still be dangerous even if they aren't aggressive. Those owners are the few who spoil it for the many. Sadly, that's the case in lots of aspects of life. I'd rather those owners had their dogs taken from them than that all dogs and owners were penalised by dogs always having to be on leads, which I can see happening in the not too distant future if something isn't done about the bad owners.

In my experience, a dog that is obedient to quiet commands is a happy, secure dog. Disobedient dogs are often insecure and anxious, as they don't know where they stand with their inconsistent but shouty owners; this makes the dog unhappy and can make them dangerous too.
There are lots of training classes out there for dogs and their owners, there's no excuse for having an out of control dog.

(My bold/italics). I agree. For me it is far more often hazards other than dogs where exactly the same applies (not "being on a lead" but being under control or being considerate of other users). But as you do, you can achieve a lot more through being pleasant than by being angry.

Though I can't see significant changes happening to dog ownership rules (not in the short/medium term anyway).

Ian
bocage-biking
Posts: 1
Joined: 28 Sep 2015, 3:26pm
Location: Normandy, France
Contact:

Re: Bloody labrador

Post by bocage-biking »

I guess it all comes down to the fact that we share this planet, and some people use it considerately and others don't. My wife and I are on both sides of this debate. We've just got into cycling (or, in my case, back into cycling) partly in order to exercise our 20 month-old sprollie. (Our 15 year-old spaniel rides in a trailer.)

So far we've mainly cycled on greenways, with the dogs off-lead, as they're entitled to be. When we see approaching walkers or cyclists - and the occasional horse rider - we stop, get the dogs on leads and hold them while the other people pass. This makes progress slow, but other users of the greenways are always grateful - often stopping to pet the dogs! Occasionally, of course, we meet people suddenly and there's no time to call the dogs to us, although we will always try. This has never been a problem because they're friendly and well-behaved. We've never had any other cyclists get annoyed because they've had to slow down and manoeuvre carefully around the dog.

The only time we've had a problem with one of our dogs and a cyclist was today in a local park. The guy was belting down the path on an MTB and narrowly missed the sprollie. The rider grumbled something sarky at the dog (didn't quite catch it) and looked highly displeased. The irony here is that, in this park, dogs are allowed off-leash and cyclists are banned!
Bocage Biking - recreational cycling on e-bikes in France
User avatar
661-Pete
Posts: 10593
Joined: 22 Nov 2012, 8:45pm
Location: Sussex

Re: Bloody labrador

Post by 661-Pete »

robing wrote:It will work if you put some chili powder in it. Just need to remember not to drink it ;-)

Depends what you're used to, I suppose. I don't think this guy would have any problems.
Suppose that this room is a lift. The support breaks and down we go with ever-increasing velocity.
Let us pass the time by performing physical experiments...
--- Arthur Eddington (creator of the Eddington Number).
Flinders
Posts: 3023
Joined: 10 Mar 2009, 6:47pm

Re: Bloody labrador

Post by Flinders »

Psamathe wrote:
Flinders wrote:I always make a point of thanking dog owners who call their dog to them (successfully) or put it on a lead,or draw it to one side as I approach. And I always approach slowly and with warning, and unclip in case of problems.
But a few owners are inconsiderate and can't or won't control their dogs, and their dogs can still be dangerous even if they aren't aggressive. Those owners are the few who spoil it for the many. Sadly, that's the case in lots of aspects of life. I'd rather those owners had their dogs taken from them than that all dogs and owners were penalised by dogs always having to be on leads, which I can see happening in the not too distant future if something isn't done about the bad owners.

In my experience, a dog that is obedient to quiet commands is a happy, secure dog. Disobedient dogs are often insecure and anxious, as they don't know where they stand with their inconsistent but shouty owners; this makes the dog unhappy and can make them dangerous too.
There are lots of training classes out there for dogs and their owners, there's no excuse for having an out of control dog.

(My bold/italics). I agree. For me it is far more often hazards other than dogs where exactly the same applies (not "being on a lead" but being under control or being considerate of other users). But as you do, you can achieve a lot more through being pleasant than by being angry.

Though I can't see significant changes happening to dog ownership rules (not in the short/medium term anyway).

Ian

I think dog licencing will be back fairly soon. And after that, more controls on dogs in general.
And I find it difficult to be against any of that, considering the trouble we have locally with dog fouling (and the aggressive and threatening reactions of anyone caught doing it who is asked to clear up after their dog, or not to trespass on private property with their dogs) just for a start.

One local farmer had owners allowing their dogs to foul the crop in a field with no right of way. This fouling, as well as illegal, is disgusting if it gets into food crops, and can cause abortion in cattle if it gets into silage. When the farmer asked the owners politely not to use the field, he was physically threatened and told to whatsit off, as they 'had a right' to take the dogs wherever they liked. The same culprits allowed their dogs to foul the children's playground on a daily basis, and when access was blocked, fences were ripped down and thrown down an embankment.
Psamathe
Posts: 17650
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: Bloody labrador

Post by Psamathe »

Flinders wrote:I think dog licencing will be back fairly soon. And after that, more controls on dogs in general.
And I find it difficult to be against any of that, considering the trouble we have locally with dog fouling (and the aggressive and threatening reactions of anyone caught doing it who is asked to clear up after their dog, or not to trespass on private property with their dogs) just for a start.

One local farmer had owners allowing their dogs to foul the crop in a field with no right of way. This fouling, as well as illegal, is disgusting if it gets into food crops, and can cause abortion in cattle if it gets into silage. When the farmer asked the owners politely not to use the field, he was physically threatened and told to whatsit off, as they 'had a right' to take the dogs wherever they liked. The same culprits allowed their dogs to foul the children's playground on a daily basis, and when access was blocked, fences were ripped down and thrown down an embankment.

I've not seen suggestions (so am open to comments and to changing my mind), but I'm unconvinced what re-introduction of dog licenses would achieve. The responsible owners would get their licenses and it would make no real difference to them. The irresponsible owners would not get a license and nobody would check and they would probably never get caught; and even if they were all that would happen would be maybe they would be made to buy one (provided they did not start mentioning the hardship they would then suffer ...). I can't see the dogs being taken off them and put into rescue for rehoming (I suspect that even the responsible dog owners would start to disagree with that given how bad dog rescue is for many dogs). Given the complete lack of enforcement with mobile phone use in vehicles and the severe danger that causes, I can't see any effort being put into enforcement of dog licenses. Cyclist takes video of a really dangerous close pass to Police (including video of the mobile held to the drivers ear and the reg no) and nothing is done. What would Police do with video of a dog where there is no id plates to lookup, no license and the behaviour open to question anyway ?

Ian
pwa
Posts: 17368
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: Bloody labrador

Post by pwa »

For anyone too young to remember, dog licencing was abandoned because it cost too much to collect, and the people who obeyed the rules got licences and the ones who didn't obey the rules didn't, and generally got away with it. I expect it would be just like that if it was reintroduced.

On the subject of dog mess, in my village things have improved quite a lot over the last ten years. I estimate that dog mess is down to about a third of what it once was. There are just as many dogs but most people are bagging and binning.
User avatar
Heltor Chasca
Posts: 3016
Joined: 30 Aug 2014, 8:18pm
Location: Near Bath & The Mendips in Somerset

Re: Bloody labrador

Post by Heltor Chasca »

I am an owner of a highly trained animal and I'm fairly intuitive when it comes to canines. However dogs are dogs and I would never fully trust ANY of them. Too many people lack the skills and any common sense and own them because it's fashionable right now and they see it as part of being a normal family.

One such family who I work for has a very tricky black lab. He has been very aggressive towards me however his behaviour has moderated in the past months. I had put it down to my ability to read him and know what to do and how to treat him. After all I walk his about his territory with intimidating and loud tools.

It was all going so well...Until yesterday...The client opened the front door and let him out unrestrained. He body slammed me at shoulder height and barked in my face as he flew past. This is a 'last resort' intimidation tactic employed by dogs before they bite. I wasn't bitten but it wasn't far off. What did the owner say? 'Oh what was he up to? Tut tut. I think he was very excited and pleased to see you!' [emoji57]

Yes exactly. I'm thinking what you are thinking.

I'm a tough fellow, but I'll be honest: I got a fright,
Flinders
Posts: 3023
Joined: 10 Mar 2009, 6:47pm

Re: Bloody labrador

Post by Flinders »

Heltor Chasca wrote:I am an owner of a highly trained animal and I'm fairly intuitive when it comes to canines. However dogs are dogs and I would never fully trust ANY of them. Too many people lack the skills and any common sense and own them because it's fashionable right now and they see it as part of being a normal family.

One such family who I work for has a very tricky black lab. He has been very aggressive towards me however his behaviour has moderated in the past months. I had put it down to my ability to read him and know what to do and how to treat him. After all I walk his about his territory with intimidating and loud tools.

It was all going so well...Until yesterday...The client opened the front door and let him out unrestrained. He body slammed me at shoulder height and barked in my face as he flew past. This is a 'last resort' intimidation tactic employed by dogs before they bite. I wasn't bitten but it wasn't far off. What did the owner say? 'Oh what was he up to? Tut tut. I think he was very excited and pleased to see you!' [emoji57]

Yes exactly. I'm thinking what you are thinking.

I'm a tough fellow, but I'll be honest: I got a fright,


That dog is seriously dangerous. It's only a matter of time before it goes for a human, and that human could be a child.

The problem with licences is that they do cost money, but every horse has by law now to be chipped and have a 'passport', and owners just have to stump up the full cost of that. Dogs ought to be the same. Then complaints can be logged and regular offenders (dogs or humans) dealt with. It would also help with the problem of lost and stolen dogs.
User avatar
Heltor Chasca
Posts: 3016
Joined: 30 Aug 2014, 8:18pm
Location: Near Bath & The Mendips in Somerset

Bloody labrador

Post by Heltor Chasca »

Sadly Flinders you are 100% correct. I am certain this dog will bite someone and it's all going to end in tears for this family. It may well be me.

With regard to licences: I grew up in a country where dog licences were mandatory. And yes it means you need to think a bit more about your reasoning behind dog ownership but they are very useful for getting your lost dog back. Extra red tape? Oh yes, but a hell of a lot less than the legal paperwork and palaver AFTER an accident or otherwise involving a dog.

EDIT: This is a show strain lab which I believe are even trickier when it comes to training and temperament. Incidentally the client is a VERY slow payer. Writing's on the wall isn't it? [emoji44]
User avatar
NATURAL ANKLING
Posts: 13780
Joined: 24 Oct 2012, 10:43pm
Location: English Riviera

Re: Bloody labrador

Post by NATURAL ANKLING »

Hi,
ian s wrote:Whilst my experience was whilst running, it is possibly relevant to cycling. Running in the dark, but with streetlamps on I was approaching a person and a dog on opposite sides of the track. I was about to run between them when I suddenly realised there was the fairly thin cord of an extending dog lead between them. I managed to stop before falling headlong, but only just.


This is a classic :!:

Had similar yesterday.
And many times before...............
As a dog owner / lover I always want to protect my pet by putting myself between the danger and my pet.....why wouldn't you.......

Advise to ALL dog owners, always walk to your animal not wait to see if it will come to you and clearly understands English :roll:

Standing on opposite side of path is not an option...................
NA Thinks Just End 2 End Return + Bivvy - Some day Soon I hope
You'll Still Find Me At The Top Of A Hill
Please forgive the poor Grammar I blame it on my mobile and phat thinkers.
Flinders
Posts: 3023
Joined: 10 Mar 2009, 6:47pm

Re: Bloody labrador

Post by Flinders »

Heltor Chasca wrote:Sadly Flinders you are 100% correct. I am certain this dog will bite someone and it's all going to end in tears for this family. It may well be me.

With regard to licences: I grew up in a country where dog licences were mandatory. And yes it means you need to think a bit more about your reasoning behind dog ownership but they are very useful for getting your lost dog back. Extra red tape? Oh yes, but a hell of a lot less than the legal paperwork and palaver AFTER an accident or otherwise involving a dog.

EDIT: This is a show strain lab which I believe are even trickier when it comes to training and temperament. Incidentally the client is a VERY slow payer. Writing's on the wall isn't it? [emoji44]


Generally working strains of breeds are more sensible, as nutcase dogs don't get bred from just because they 'look nice' (conform to 'breed type') - breeders of working dogs want healthy, sensible, intelligent dogs, as nutcase dogs are hard to train and would disrupt a shoot or round-up. I would always choose a working strain of a breed over a show one of the same breed even if I wanted a dog that wouldn't be working (though if you do this you have to give the dog a lot of exercise and other things to do to soak up all that energy and intelligence that would otherwise go on working).

Licencing/passporting and chipping is great for dealing with lost and stolen animals.
Flinders
Posts: 3023
Joined: 10 Mar 2009, 6:47pm

Re: Bloody labrador

Post by Flinders »

I note this:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-la ... e-34945382

About time someone was held to account for out of control dogs on retractable leads. I think those leads should be banned. Everywhere.
User avatar
Heltor Chasca
Posts: 3016
Joined: 30 Aug 2014, 8:18pm
Location: Near Bath & The Mendips in Somerset

Re: Bloody labrador

Post by Heltor Chasca »

Flinders wrote:I note this:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-la ... e-34945382

About time someone was held to account for out of control dogs on retractable leads. I think those leads should be banned. Everywhere.


+1
Post Reply