My dogs and I were attacked by a pitt bull this morning (we're OK)

[rugbygirl]

Hound hill, a Sue Humphreys from the Wolfhound association was quoted in this 2010 article:
http://globalnews.ca/news/91699/spca-bullies-dog-owner/

and I think this same hoarder (Irving) was involved again in a 2015 seizure.

I see that I was wrong though, it was only 80 dogs in 2010 40 in 2007/08 and it was the SPCA worker who told me they were “feral”. That’s not how the owner presents them. I know the SPCA was really struggling to house the dogs, because they were acting as a feral pack. Again per the stressed out worker. The pack was terrifying. I was there to walk a homeless dog. I didn’t go back. The whole experience was terrifying.

[Houndhill]

[QUOTE=rugbygirl;8899645]
I’ll be interested if they have any details on it, I’m very curious what those dogs were, if not Irish Wolfhounds. I always thought the Irish Wolfhound had kind of an unmistakable silhouette, but I’m not a serious dog fancier. I know that some “tough guys” at work had discussed them as being the “biggest” breed of dog, which engendered a lively debate with someone who clearly favored the mastiff for sheer size. I believe they settled on the Wolfhound being the TALLEST.[/QUOTE]

Yes, they are the tallest breed, though not the heaviest. I have a male now who is about 37" at the withers and 195 pounds. Mastiffs etc can be much heavier, but Irish Wofhounds retain the greyhound like build.

They are far from unmistakeable however- many shelters label any big rough coated dog a wolfhound or wolfhound mix, because they are much more likely to get adopted. I often am called upon to go look at “wolfhounds” at animal shelters and rarely are they even remotely a wolfhound mix.

My Irish Wolfhound just won Best of Breed at the Irish Wolfound Club of Canada National Specialty Show. I will certainly make inquiries about the situation you have described.

[rugbygirl]

I was very curious, and disgusted to learn that she has apparently done it AGAIN.
http://www.lfpress.com/2015/01/29/after-319-dogs-seized-is-alberta-woman-canadas-worst-pet-owner

It is a testament to the breed that they were rehomed after this, and well done to the breed association. When I came across this, the SPCA was holding the 80 dogs until the case was resolved. Adoption wasn’t being discussed.

40 dogs? I guess it was before 2010 in Fort Mac. Wow I’m getting old.

[Houndhill]

[QUOTE=rugbygirl;8899675]
I was very curious, and disgusted to learn that she has apparently done it AGAIN.
http://www.lfpress.com/2015/01/29/after-319-dogs-seized-is-alberta-woman-canadas-worst-pet-owner

It is a testament to the breed that they were rehomed after this, and well done to the breed association. When I came across this, the SPCA was holding the 80 dogs until the case was resolved. Adoption wasn’t being discussed.

40 dogs? I guess it was before 2010 in Fort Mac. Wow I’m getting old.[/QUOTE]

From the articles, I see only one actualy identified as an Irish Wofhound, and she was not considered in any way aggressive, poor creature.

But, I will await more info from the IWCC.

I can’t see how this situation can be translated into a call for all Irish Wolfhounds to be muzzled in public and spayed/ neutered so there would be no more of them.

Have not yet talked with IWCC.

[rugbygirl]

It says they’ve been involved with all three of her seizures, so they should definitely have some more information! I can see why they’d want to be involved. Western Canada is relatively small, population wise, and Wolfhounds are not exactly popular as pets. Its disturbing that she was able to acquire (three times, apparently) intact animals and breed them without alerting anyone in the breed community.

Sorry to say, nothing I’m reviewing here makes me change my mind. Stringent large dog restrictions would have given the SPCA some teeth in prosecuting her. As long as this lady remains free to acquire animals, they pose a risk.

[skyon]

[QUOTE=Perfect10;8899539]
That’s ridiculous. What about police dogs? A well run schutzhund club is very aware of what the dog is able to do and installs commands to stop an attack well before they get to the point of bitework.[/QUOTE]

No. That is not ridiculous. In fact the more I read these posts claiming that that these dogs can be turned off, the more I think it important to bring this question to light at a local level.

Does it mean dogs that have been trained to attack humans - -specifically - should be banned as well as schutzhund- nope.

Does it mean that the local schutzhund club should keep record of which dog/owner had this training - yes. Does that mean that maybe that question should be asked by housing associations, condo, insurance - I think so.

Please read the story on the other page It’s one thing to run a a club like this in a rural area and sell the dogs as guard dogs to private shop/military/police. A whole other thing to promote them and sell guard/protection dogs for the family .

Also, what disturbed me in the WI case, was that if those articles are correct, that dog was almost claimed a Service Dog. The videos promoting him as having good bite pushed it into a deeper discussion of what type of training they were really doing.

[Arbitrary]

Late to this, but this is germane.

http://www.dogstardaily.com/blogs/michelle-douglas/open-letter-rescue-groups

[Houndhill]

[QUOTE=rugbygirl;8899712]
It says they’ve been involved with all three of her seizures, so they should definitely have some more information! I can see why they’d want to be involved. Western Canada is relatively small, population wise, and Wolfhounds are not exactly popular as pets. Its disturbing that she was able to acquire (three times, apparently) intact animals and breed them without alerting anyone in the breed community.

Sorry to say, nothing I’m reviewing here makes me change my mind. Stringent large dog restrictions would have given the SPCA some teeth in prosecuting her. As long as this lady remains free to acquire animals, they pose a risk.[/QUOTE]

I agree that the laws in this part of Canada seem very lax, but they seem equally lax in applying to hoarding situations that involve small dogs, which is most common, as well as large dogs.

I have spoken to Irish Wolfhound Club of Canada board members who were deeply involved in this situation.

The good news is, in the second seizure, there were nine Irish Wolfhounds that the SPCA turned over to IWCC Rescue within a week, and all were re-homed with experienced Irish Wolfhound owners. None had any issues with aggression, then or since being re-homed.

None of April Irving’s dogs were reported to be loose or at large.

Bad news- the first seizure, there were three Irish Wolfhounds which, incredibly, were returned to April.

The Club believes they know where at least one of them came from, a less than reputable breeder who is not an IWCC member.

April is now “on the run”, she had acquired additional dogs, but fled when it seemed she would be investigated. The club believes they have not heard the last from her.

While I do agree laws that affect this need to be changed or enforced- evidently after the first seizure, when she moved, one SPCA did not communicate with the other in the new location- I disagree that a breed-specific law requiring muzzling when in public would be the best way to proceed. This type of hoarding situation can and often does affect small dog breeds. Laws mandating basic care, feeding, and housing should be enforced.

These Irish Wolfhounds never posed a risk to anyone. BSL would not have prevented this situation.

I hope that a breed which is far, far down at the bottom of the list of breeds likely to bite people does not get targeted for BSL simply because of their size.

I understand seeing Irish Wolfhounds and other large breeds at the SPCA shelter could terrify anyone. They do “act as a feral pack” because they are pack hounds, , they do typically live together and behave cooperatively.

I hope this adds a little information to the situation.

[khall]

Arbitrary, I agree whole heartedly with this blog. Pit bull type dogs or any large breed of dog should be thoroughly temperament tested before being put up for adoption. As a foster I push the buttons on my foster dogs all the time to see how they will react. Can I take their food away, can I take a high value treat or toy away. I train them though that they will get a reward (usually) when I do take their “stuff” away. Either with two toy play or yummier treat than what they have, but I also will “make mistakes” with them to see how they will act. My pit bull foster I trust 100% with ANY person, she has no aggression to people AT ALL. Now she is dog selective though her best friend is a 28 lb terrier mix.

[rugbygirl]

It’s nice that they were rehomed. If you don’t have a problematic, indiscriminate breeder of Wolfhounds in your municipality, then you probably wouldn’t support that particular restriction. I still do, but I support harsh restrictions on all dogs over 20 lbs in urban areas. You can always move to the country! My favourite dogs are in the giant family too, it’s one of the reasons we live on a farm.

It’s interesting that they weren’t reported at large, but it’s true, when I ran into the pack, they were definitely contained. The malamute and other unidentifiable cross breeds DID strike me as the more aggressive. I have a distinct memory of the three I originally thought were Wolfhounds standing toward the back of the enclosure, I’d characterize them as “aloof.”

How a first time volunteer was able to mistakenly stumble into the yard where a PACK of “feral” *(again, that’s definitely the word the worker used) large dogs was out for exercise is another problem entirely.

I’m also all for municipal breeder certification. I know most breeders recoil at the idea. That’s part of my spay/neuter thing. Want an unaltered dog? Ok. Buy a municipal breeding license. The income can go to pay for the expensive process of finding and prosecuting puppy millers.

[rugbygirl]

[QUOTE=Arbitrary;8900653]
Late to this, but this is germane.

http://www.dogstardaily.com/blogs/michelle-douglas/open-letter-rescue-groups[/QUOTE]

I love this, but my immediate reaction was “every single rescue thinks they are doing it right already.” My second reaction was “unless you yourself are an expert, it is VERY hard to tell a charlatan from a real expert in canine behaviour.”

Eta: I’m no expert. It took me fully nine weeks of puppy class at a popular, well recommended school to realize the instructor was awful. It was puppy class, we survived, but we were NOT interested in taking more classes.

[Marshfield]

[QUOTE=rugbygirl;8900950]

I’m also all for municipal breeder certification. I know most breeders recoil at the idea. That’s part of my spay/neuter thing. Want an unaltered dog? Ok. Buy a municipal breeding license. The income can go to pay for the expensive process of finding and prosecuting puppy millers.[/QUOTE]

So those of us who are responsible, with long wait lists, lifetime responsibility for any puppies produced, and health tested dogs get to pay extra so the irresponsible can be sought out? It’s just punishing the responsible breeders.

[Perfect10]

[QUOTE=Marshfield;8901110]
So those of us who are responsible, with long wait lists, lifetime responsibility for any puppies produced, and health tested dogs get to pay extra so the irresponsible can be sought out? It’s just punishing the responsible breeders.[/QUOTE]

If it keeps even one dog that will eventually be euthanized due to aggression or live in terrible conditions their entire miserable life from being born, it is worth it. You have to pay to play.

[red_mares]

[QUOTE=Perfect10;8901128]
If it keeps even one dog that will eventually be euthanized due to aggression or live in terrible conditions their entire miserable life from being born, it is worth it. You have to pay to play.[/QUOTE]

How about we just euthanize the bad dogs and be done with it? And I mean actually kill aggressive dogs, not screw around with 10’ fences and muzzles.

I don’t have any problem at all with bad animals (who got that way for whatever reason) being put down.

[DogIsMyCopilot]

I think it is remarkable how people seem to be ok with BSL and regulations… as long as it doesn’t affect what THEY are doing and the dogs THEY have.
It’s fine to regulate Pit Bulls, but as soon as Wolfhounds are mentioned, a Wolfhound fancier comes out of the woodworks and asks for their breed to be removed from that list, cause it’s just one bad apple and anyways, those dogs weren’t registered wolfhounds to begin with.
It’s fne to regulate Pit Bulls, but as soon as some regulation over breeding is proposed, a breeder comes out saying it’s not fair that they should suffer for the irresponsible kind of breeders.
Well guess what, that’s exactly how we feel who own Pit Bull type dogs as regular family dogs without any incident.

People ask for phenotypic breed identification to weed out evil breeds, and at the same time Cane Corsos and Dogo/Presa Canarios get lumped in with the “Pit Bull types”. But if you shave down a Newfie (who has been mentioned on this thread as being one of THE most docile dog breeds ever created) it will look more like a Presa than any Pit Bull ever will - because it’s in the same breed group (FCI group 2), while the AmStaff (Pit Bull type) is not. “Large mastiff type dogs” include breeds like the Bernese Mtn Dog, the Leonberger, the Great Dane…

As rugbygirl’s list grows longer and longer to include Mastiff type dogs over 15lbs (what is that even supposed to mean? Pugs? Boston Terriers?) it would probably be easiest to just apply whatever regulation to all dogs and be done with it. Easier to enforce too, since it would spare everyone the discussion if their dog is in the “bad” category or not.

Surely, if it’s no big deal to muzzle and leash your big dog in public at all times, it shouldn’t be a big deal for small dog owners either, right? End of problem, sorry for those who never did anything wrong, but surely you’re willing to take one for the team in the interest of public safety.

[rugbygirl]

If the only way to get large dog owners to take responsibility for dog bites is muzzlIng small dogs, FINE.

I’m fine separating them out by size though. And tailoring regulations locally. If you don’t have an overpopulation of jerk humans with large dogs who are PROUD of the damage they can do, and you don’t have a problem with vicious dogs in your community, then your city shouldn’t waste time legislation. Cities where people are killed by dogs, and where people are afraid to walk, cities where small dogs are mauled to death in dog parks more often than once a year…yep. Pay to play for ALL dog owners. Dog ownership in a city isn’t an in in alienable right.

[rugbygirl]

[QUOTE=Marshfield;8901110]
So those of us who are responsible, with long wait lists, lifetime responsibility for any puppies produced, and health tested dogs get to pay extra so the irresponsible can be sought out? It’s just punishing the responsible breeders.[/QUOTE]

Yep. How many public resources need to be spent dealing with feral dog packs and the other fun results of indiscriminate breeding? I have NO PROBLEM with all dog owners contributing more to that pile. Oddly enough, I think that if you want to sell puppies, you deserve to pay into the public kitty. If you view it as a punishment, or it makes breeding too costly for you… That’s too bad. This is all why dog legislation never gets anywhere though. I’ve never seen a breeder provide a proposal other than “leave me alone, go catch other people.”

[Angela_Freda]

[QUOTE=rugbygirl;8901252]
If the only way to get large dog owners to take responsibility for dog bites is muzzlIng small dogs, FINE.

I’m fine separating them out by size though. And tailoring regulations locally. If you don’t have an overpopulation of jerk humans with large dogs who are PROUD of the damage they can do, and you don’t have a problem with vicious dogs in your community, then your city shouldn’t waste time legislation. Cities where people are killed by dogs, and where people are afraid to walk, cities where small dogs are mauled to death in dog parks more often than once a year…yep. Pay to play for ALL dog owners. Dog ownership in a city isn’t an in in alienable right.[/QUOTE]

well said

[Houndhill]

[QUOTE=DogIsMyCopilot;8901242]
I think it is remarkable how people seem to be ok with BSL and regulations… as long as it doesn’t affect what THEY are doing and the dogs THEY have.
It’s fine to regulate Pit Bulls, but as soon as Wolfhounds are mentioned, a Wolfhound fancier comes out of the woodworks and asks for their breed to be removed from that list, cause it’s just one bad apple and anyways, those dogs weren’t registered wolfhounds to begin with.
It’s fne to regulate Pit Bulls, but as soon as some regulation over breeding is proposed, a breeder comes out saying it’s not fair that they should suffer for the irresponsible kind of breeders.
Well guess what, that’s exactly how we feel who own Pit Bull type dogs as regular family dogs without any incident.

People ask for phenotypic breed identification to weed out evil breeds, and at the same time Cane Corsos and Dogo/Presa Canarios get lumped in with the “Pit Bull types”. But if you shave down a Newfie (who has been mentioned on this thread as being one of THE most docile dog breeds ever created) it will look more like a Presa than any Pit Bull ever will - because it’s in the same breed group (FCI group 2), while the AmStaff (Pit Bull type) is not. “Large mastiff type dogs” include breeds like the Bernese Mtn Dog, the Leonberger, the Great Dane…

As rugbygirl’s list grows longer and longer to include Mastiff type dogs over 15lbs (what is that even supposed to mean? Pugs? Boston Terriers?) it would probably be easiest to just apply whatever regulation to all dogs and be done with it. Easier to enforce too, since it would spare everyone the discussion if their dog is in the “bad” category or not.

Surely, if it’s no big deal to muzzle and leash your big dog in public at all times, it shouldn’t be a big deal for small dog owners either, right? End of problem, sorry for those who never did anything wrong, but surely you’re willing to take one for the team in the interest of public safety.[/QUOTE]

Oh no, I agree with you.

I am also opposed to BSL, as applied to Pit Bulls or any other breed. I was just staying out of this particular discussion as I see no purpose in it, but I admit I could not resist being drawn in at the mention of the “town that had a problem with feral wolfhounds”!

I have read and greatly appreciated the Bronwen Dickey book on Pit Bulls. I admit I was a skeptic about reading it as I felt she was a journalist, not a scientist, but I was greatly impressed with the depth of her scientific research.

I’m a big “Blame the deed, not the breed” person and have given input when asked about our community’s Dangerous Dog Legislation, which thankfully was passed in a form that is not breed specific.

[rugbygirl]

Well, you did determine a pack that included Wolfhounds was seized in the town, and became aware of three seizures of actual Wolfhounds that you weren’t previously aware of. I disagree with you that those dogs posed no threar, you didn’t interact with them, and I did. I will admit that the crosses seemed more aggressive. I’m glad they went to experienced people. If they’d been adopted to the general public, I feel that would have posed a real threat. Euthanasia was apparently never on the table due to a strict no kill policy.

So hopefully next time someone alerts you about an issue with your breed, you won’t be so quick to dismiss them out of hand. Incidentally, your reaction is almost the exact same as the reaction LOUDLY repeated by breed fanciers every time someone is attacked by any dog.