first mate

Definitely report to police and give all details. The blue van driver, if he was holding a mobile and chatting on it whilst trying to park, has committed an offence.

Steve T, Show me where I have leapt to the defence of, or condoned dog pooh offenders? At no point have I said that I am all in favour of dog pooh or that I support those who leave their pet turds strewn around the streets (cue snigger of other forumites at ludicrous post). I just think that sometimes people try to justify a view with extreme points that don't really serve or support their argument. No rational person would say they "like" dog pooh all over the streets. There again, I feel some people get a little irrational on the subject and conflate a fear/dislike of all dogs with the issue of dog pooh (not looking at anyone in particular, Steve). There is a solution and that is that we all clear away dog pooh when we see it ( outside our house for instance). If you use a plastic bag it cannot hurt you. Yes, it is unpleasant and yes, you may feel you shouldn't have to but where antisocial behaviour is concerned perhaps this is the only way forward- or we just go round and round, repeating the same arguments and achieving nothing?! For what it is worth, I do try to clear up other dog turds,as and when I bag those belonging to my own,just as I would pick up stuff like glass if I see it lying around- community spirit it's called.

ZT, yes, on very rare occasions a child may go blind after contact with dog pooh or fox pooh, or some other carrier, but it is a relatively rare cause of harm to humans. My point is that a child is far more likely to die because of a speeding car than dog or fox pooh. The real issue is that dog pooh offends and it is a nuisance and that is why people dislike it. If you want to argue the case that we need to rid the streets of dog pooh because it is a major health hazard then expect a counter argument that points to more pressing health concerns.

I know of someone whose son nearly died after contracting Weil's by playing in the street (via rat urine). Zoonotic infections are a risk that goes hand in hand with living in an environment we share with other living organisms. Fox poo (found all around ED by the way) is also a carrier of Toxcariasis so what are we going to do about that? At least most dogs are wormed. Foxes are not. There are far greater risks to child health than dog pooh- speeding cars for instance.

Did the note from the MET really suggest valuable police resources will be used to track down owners that do not pick up dog pooh- surely not?! Tracking down owners of dangerous dogs would make sense but dog pooh? Must say I can think of better ways for the MET to occupy their time.

Ridgely, if that's the worst you can think of I'd love to live in your world. I guess if we all feel so strongly how about a bit of community action and just pick it up ourselves and bin it. It won't kill you-honest. That seems to me the most practical solution.

A useful way of getting rid of dog urine smell is first to wash well with a washing powder and then rinse with water, when dry wipe over with surgical spirit- this breaks down the proteins in the urine, so removing the smell. It may work with cats too.

Chrissie Hynde, Sister Rosetta Tharpe, PJ Harvey, Bjork, Nina Simone, Laura Marling, Patti Smith, Billie Gentry, Dolly Parton, Joan Armatrading, Kate Bush.........

Fair enough. Other than Joni Mitchell- who else?

I have a question- why can't women write good lyrics? Or can they? If they can why no mention of any here? Answers? Theories?

Also agree Morrisey. Van the man.

Joni Mitchell deserves to be up there.

Dogs, the species I believe you are referring to, are already restricted by, for the most part, being kept on a lead. Most people agree that dogs should not be allowed to roam unleashed on the public highways and byways. Any dog that is so aggressive and strong that it can drag its owner towards something it wants to attack is, first off, so unusual that it becomes a statistical anomaly, and would not anyway be curtailed by muzzling (as Huggers has already said). Any person that regularly walks a dog offlead on the street/has a highly aggressive dog that they do not control, is not, I think, the type of person to muzzle their dog whether it is the law or not. You may not be aware that it is already illegal to cross a road with an unleashed dog- people still do it though. It is my belief that dangerous humans, prone to violent behavior, probably enjoy greater freedom and exist in greater number than do highly aggressive dogs. It's a slightly flip observation but I do feel the dog thing is somewhat sensationalised by people who don't really think through what they are saying.

It's arguable that the animal species with the greatest capacity and motivation to harm you and that is wandering around unrestrained is homo sapien.

Huggers, Quite.

Steve T The Pedigree Dogs Exposed programme which you refer to was highly contentious. Yes, there are problems in some breeds, but the KC was already on to the German Shepherd club before the programme was made. I saw the programme in question and have to say that although valid points were made there was a terrific lack of balance, the KC was not represented fairly (though it did not help itself by the quality of interviewee on offer). I am neither an apologist for the KC or for the PDE documentary but the simplistic view that all line breeding is inherently wrong and all outcrossing is inherently right is misleading, as is the notion that crossbreeds are always more healthy. The whole territory of genetics and hereditary disease is much more complex and breeders are learning. Sure you get bad apples and money- making opportunists but I would say the majority of pedigree dog breeders care passionately about their animals and in ensuring they are as healthy as they look. A virtue of the pedigree animal is that in terms of look, size, temperament, drive (and some knowledge of illness in the line) you pretty much know from generation to generation what you are getting, with a crossbreed you don't. This is why line breeding is used in producing livestock, the successful farmer wants to know what he'll get. In the view of many in the dog world the whole furore around PDE was misplaced energy. A far greater concern is the puppy farmer and back yard breeder who do not register their dogs with the KC. They'll mix up any old combination of breeds if they think it'll sell and they don't care about temperament or health and they are the reason why we see so many rescues overflowing with unwanted bull breed crosses and why out on the street you'll see a thug with his bull breed bitch, nipples almost to the ground because she is being used as a money making machine. Forgive me, this has sweet *f* all to do with the Kennel Club. Finally, Pedigree Chum withdrew their sponsorship from Crufts an annual event. Who cares. I would not feed something like that to my dog anymore than I would feed my kids on a diet of chips. (Sorry Admin if I cannot say that here)

Dirty Box, What are the facts upon which you base your conclusions about the Kennel Club? Cocker Spaniels generally make great family pets. As we know, however, lots of people buy a dog without knowing how to bring them up etc.. (bit like people who have kids but are rotten parents) a badly brought up dog can behave badly. Cockers are a popular dog therefore the liklihood of them turning up in any set of statistics is greater, both as biters (result of bad owners)and as good family pets. There is another element, it is believed that solid coloured, red, Cockers may be prone to a type of neurological problem that manifests as sudden, out of the blue, rage attacks- known as cocker rage. Yes, staffs were in part bred for fighting OTHER DOGS, not people. As already explained, they were developed to be highly affectionate and biddable to people. The Staffs that attack people are either crossbreeds, fruitloops or have ignorant/bad owners that do things like leaving them alone with a toddler (a seriously bonkers thing to do)or abuse them through puppyhood to make them wary and aggressive to humans. My own problem with Staffs and the like is the people that own them. Anyone who owns a Staff should know that they have to take extra care around other dogs and animals outside their own household. A properly brought up Staff will have been carefully socialised with other dog breeds and have learned what will and won't be tolerated- such dogs are little problem.The bad owner will usually insist on keeping their bull breed entire and that creates further problems. The much bigger issue is that dogs that look like Staffs probably have something else in them and so you don't know what mad mix you are dealing with

MSC, Well said.

Staffordshire Bull Terriers are generally very good with people and children, ironically this is because they were developed for fighting in the pits and for bull baiting. They are stalwart and therefore prepared to be pulled around by children in a way many other breeds are not. Ironically their fighting past is what makes them so good and so biddable with people (they could be pulled off another dog in the pit without the owner getting bitten, as would happen in many other cases of owner intervention in a dog fight)that past also makes them unreliable with other dogs and once they go they will not give in, hence the popular myth of the locked jaw- it's not locked, they simply have an iron will and are relatively impervious to pain. Many so-called Staffs are mixed up with other breeds and the pure Staff temperament may be compromised. Add a guard breed into the Staff gene pool and you have a lethal mix. People have to tread much more carefully around guard breeds if they have not been properly trained and socialised from puppyhood-think GSD, Dobermann, Rottie. In the right hands - great dogs. I think this is where things have really gone awry: with the crossbreeds. Might look like a Staff but you can't tell. In addition, as we know, too many bull breeds attract the wrong sort of owner, lazy, ignorant and irresponsible. In the link that cate gave about dangerous dogs there are terrible stories, but I note that in one about a Staff that attacked a child the dog was in fact a rescue, and an entire male, they'd only had him for 2 months but were already leaving their toddlers alone with him. My heart bleeds for the parents but their ignorance is astounding. You never ever leave any dog alone with toddlers- and no, they are not nannies. I believe the biggest problem is the easy access of far too many to dog ownership. Wish I had a reasonable solution.

am, Good for you. Please let us know how it goes. For what it is worth I have had to grab various offlead staffy types, when they have meandered up to me and my dog whilst walking on the pavement. Many dogs on a lead can feel intensely threatened when a dog that is offlead goes up to them- this is how fights can begin and why outside of parks and gardens people should always walk their dogs on a lead-there is really no excuse. In your case am it is clear your dog did nothing to provoke the attack other than simply existing.

slims, not a very helpful response to what should be a serious debate. Any dog owner that lets their dog offlead in a park needs to know, more or less, how their dog is likely to react around other dogs and to monitor/control their dog accordingly. I am guessing from your post that you own a staffy? You may well be aware that many dogs react badly to Staffs. Staffs, a bit like labradors, can be over familiar and rambunctious in a way other breeds find threatening, rude and dominant. The general body language/demeanour of a staffy is quite dominant and cocky. Staffs cannot help it, poor loves, it's how they've been bred to look and that strutting is what make them so popular with self-styled hard guy brigade. The last point makes me giggle because anyone who knows dogs is aware that Staffs are amongst the most biddable and easy of terriers where people are concerned and it needs little skill to handle them (though it does need a modicum of common sense), this is why so many boys are able to walk a "staff" beside them offlead, try doing that with a chihuahua! I do agree though people with toy breeds should never forget they own a DOG and that other dogs view it as a DOG, so if a Chihuahua is allowed to run up snarling and snapping at a Rottweiler you cannot blame the Rottie if it has a go back, after all it is only a DOG. Chihuahua's can be like tiny gremlins in cute, furry outfits, very, very feisty.

Something that looks like a staffy is not necessarily a staffy- it may be a crossbreed. This is the problem with banning dangerous dogs by breed or type. Many of these problem dogs are crossbreeds anyway- it would take a DNA test to know for sure whether a dog is a certain breed or not and that does not come cheap. Also, once you ban one fighting breed people move on to the next- what about Akitas, Sharpeis, American Bulldogs..... all currently legal, all arguably worse because they are people wary and guardy too, unlike Staffys which are people friendly. I believe passionately that all dogs should be put on a lead once outside the front door, even at the threshold. No dogs offlead on any pavement or street. Dogs need to run so they should be allowed offlead in parks and owners have the choice whether to take a toy breed to the park or not. Clearly a toy may get all the exercise it needs pavement walking, or in a garden if you are lucky enough to have one. Dogs offlead on the street are a potential menace, primarily to other dogs but also to children.

ianr, I take your point. However, there is in my experience a type of bull breed owner that routinely kicks their dog. Perhaps the owner in question only kicks those dogs belonging to people he chooses to threaten. My main point is that the owner threatened innocent passers by - a person and their teenage daughter- with physical violence. That is what I would be reporting to the police. My guess is that had the owner apologised profusely at the time, promised to keep his dog under proper control in future and to settle any vet bills to the other person's dog should the need arise, then the matter would not have reached this forum. The central issue is this man's behavior.

I too would report it to the police. The guy used intimidating behavior and threatened you- he sounds like a bully and a visit from the police would do him good. He knows he was in the wrong but rather than apologise he chose to abuse you- that's what bullies do. How typical that he owns a staff and that the technique used to "control" his dog is to kick it- tells you everything you need to know about him. It is hard, but unless we take a stand against people like this they'll carry on with worse. Staffs are not bad dogs, they are great with people and children but can be horrendous with other dogs, especially small ones that they treat as prey. They were originally developed to fight other dogs, bait bulls and for the rat pit. It is another example of someone owning a breed without taking responsibility for what the dog is capable of. anyone with a small dog is always on the lookout for staffs and the like, and their tendency to attack other dogs is why I get so angry when people insist on walking them offlead on the pavement. Why not add this to the Safer Neighbourhoods Thread- the team could pay this guy a visit.

Anywhere a fox can survive can be considered its "natural" habitat. Like humans they are opportunists, highly adaptable to a range of environments. Yes, they can make a huge racket but think what humans inflict on the rest of wildlife with our fireworks,etc.. Think neutering better than culling but more expensive in short term. Wanted to add that Reynard also helps keep local mouse and rat population down.