first mate

I do know about dogs and puppy and dog care. Please be clear that if, as you say, this is a very young puppy that has not been vaccinated then what these people have done in tying it up outside for three hours is nothing short of outrageous. Dogs are highly social animals, separation from the pack or family group is something that has to be learned over time. This pup will only have just left its mother and littermates it will be trying to adapt to a new environment and will need security. To be tied up outside in the cold on its own is punishing and unnatural and the first stage to creating a traumatised pup that grows into a problem dog. It goes without saying that a young pup should not be awake for three straight hours, like babies they eat and sleep regularly. I dread to think what else these people may be doing. I am seriously concerned about this. The very best information on puppy care can be found in Gwen Bailey's publication "The Perfect Puppy". It sounds like this family could not cope with the pup under their feet at Christmas and one can conclude that they are not properly prepared and may have gone for a cute, impulse buy. These people need a puppy pen. This can be set up in the kitchen, with the pup's bed etc in it. This way, at busy times the pup can be with its family without getting under people's feet. If you continue to witness more abuse of this pup (tying it up outside is abuse) then please report the family. I just have to add that the thought of a perfectly decent little pup being totally screwed up for life by some feckless, irresponsible family really makes my blood boil. Our rescue centres are overflowing as it is. If the family are simply clueless but receptive I would be happy to give them advice or point them in the right direction. You can PM me

No, this is not right, it is animal cruelty and if this is really only a puppy (first few months) I would go so far as to report them. No dog, let alone a puppy, should be left tied up outside for three hours (though I know some people do this). The puppy could be traumatised. It sounds as though these people have no idea how to care for a dog. How big is the pup, is it black or white? I feel very concerned by what you have said, would it be possible to check that the pup has been taken in?

PK, Yes, a little transparency and less of the point-scoring and little word games so may politicians, would-be or not, seem addicted to would be wonderfully refreshing. VikkiM and Gavin may be passionate about local issues because they live here but they are also after holding political posts and should be completely upfront about that.

I'd like to see Gavin and VikkiM and the like, adopt user names that reveal clearly their political motivations and affiliations ie "Gavin Edwards Labour Party candidate/ campaigning for the Labour party, or better still just have a dedicated Politicians area.

Daizie, I'm glad your little dog has survived. What an awful experience. My advice is give anything that looks like a bull breed or oriental fighting breed (Staffs and Staff/pit/Am staff types, American Bulldogs, EBT's, Mastiffs, Akitas and Shar Peis) a very wide berth. Unless I know the owner and dog extremely well I would simply walk in the opposite direction as soon as possible. It sounds draconian and I know that it is grossly unfair on those people that own properly socialised and well bred bull breeds but currently, for the most part, many owners and their bull/molosser type dogs are frankly dodgy. You are just safer to steer clear. It is a shame that these dogs and their owners are casting a pall over dog ownership in general. Walking the dog used to be a joy and relaxing, now you have to scan the horizon to make sure you are not going to bump into the wrong dog. With a dog as small as yours you should also be aware that some sight hounds can flip from friendly game into prey game on.

To get rid of fox pooh you'll have to get rid of the foxes. Pooh is part of nature and is used by most mammals to mark territory and communicate rank and gender. Some might suggest hiring a good marksman/woman or a really strong poison. of course I would advocate neither. Clearing pooh up is a nuisance and, of course, where dogs are concerned best done by the owners. With foxes, birds (you can catch nasty things from bird pooh too y'know) etc.. we just have to all get on with it.

Hi, Your post on joggers hit a nerve. Can't say how many times I've been startled by a heaving, grunting jogger that has suddenly burst out of the undergrowth at full pelt- generally plugged into a phone or similar, oblivious to everything, totally focused on the mission to run from A-Z come what may, and boy, you'd better get out of their way, 'cos they ain't changing their course of direction for anyone. All that lycra and pounding away on the local flora is sooooo eco friendly! Oh well, case of live and let live I guess.

ruffers, I'm sure that no person on this forum is suggesting that it is okay to scare you, but some fears are, as other posters have suggested, more phobias. It must be very hard for you but it is a fact that only a tiny, tiny minority of dogs ever attack people and most of those attacks happen within the home. You are much more at risk of injury from other people and from cars, for instance, than a dog. The biggest risk from dogs is to other dogs and then to humans, if they become involved, in trying to break up a dog fight. Even then it would not mean that the dog is human aggressive. Dogs need somewhere to run and parks are a good place. Most people make sure that their people friendly dogs do not go jumping all over strangers. I do understand that if you are scared of dogs then you really don't want them near you and it is up to owners to ensure that their dogs are properly trained. Nonetheless, I would fight any attempt to introduce dog control orders into public parks, making sure everyone keeps their dogs on lead all of the time. Dogs can play a valuable part in the lives of people, the elderly for example. They have been part of our lives for centuries and for the law abiding majority they are not a problem.

dulwichdogman, I think we are making the same point from slightly different angles. Undoubtedly good dog ownership involves proper care and husbandry, including, but not limited to: diet, exercise and training. Nonetheless, one might have an ostensibly obedient dog, as many Staffords are for instance, but in the presence of small furry animals they are triggered to chase and kill by their innate prey drive. As you know some breeds, and then individuals within that breed, will exhibit a greater tendency for prey drive. Some breeds of dog were developed over centuries for the purpose of hunting or the gaming pit. They were bred to work on their own initiative without human direction. As you know, it is hard to train a dog with high prey drive out of chasing prey; not impossible but difficult to do and not a job for someone who knows little about dog behaviour. I do not believe that a Stafford is a good beginners dog. They are obedient, for a terrier, and mainly people friendly but this can give the illusion of control. As we know, once they go they really go, whether killing cats or fighting other dogs. The single thing that would have saved the cat's life would have been for the dog to have a knowledgable and responsible owner, thus the dog would never ever have been off lead in a public place. So you see, we agree. In addition I would like to see an instant and very heavy fine for the owner of any dog offlead in a public place that is not a park.

A dog that attacks a cat is not as likely to attack a human- the two thing are completely separate and one cannot be used as a measure of the other. However, a dog off lead is a danger because many dogs, even extremely well behaved ones, can react very badly to a dog offlead coming up to it when they are on a lead. If a fight ensues, as it might, then most owners will try to intervene to save their dog or to try to stop the fight, at this juncture they run a high risk of being bitten,even by their own dog- therein is the indirect, but very real danger of having dogs offlead in the streets. You can bet your bottom dollar that most offlead dogs are uneutered, bull breed males; the type of dog most likely to engage in a fight with another dog. I don't care how well trained and obedient you think your dog is, never ever walk it off lead on the path or street because you are arrogantly putting at risk not only other dogs but people and children too and, of course, other animals, like cats, that the dog sees as prey.

It is very likely for charity. Loads of young guys are growing moustaches to support prosate cancer charities, breast cancer too, I think (guys can get breast cancer as well as women).

dulwichdogman, A good owner needs to know his breed and the individual dog/s he owns and control them accordingly. There is no doubt that some dogs, often terriers and Staffords in particular, have a stronger prey drive than other breeds (sight hounds are a problem here too). That genetic predisposition will be enhanced if they are being selectively bred for fighting and then, on top of that, encouraged to chase and kill small animals including cats and other dogs. Some Staffords are great with other animals but it is a well known fact that, as a breed, they are more likely to fight with other dogs than many other breeds. They are arguably more reliable with children and people than many other breeds unless of course they are deliberately abused and made people aggressive, as we know many are. I think the 'blame the deed not the breed' line is slightly disingenuous because we always have to consider what a dog was originally bred for. A dog that was developed for fighting will keep those traits in some of its lines. I do believe that many who get a Stafford or Staff type are won over by how friendly they are with people and forget that they cannot be trusted in the same way with other dogs and animals. Any dog may accept the animals he lives with, including cats, but those outside his "pack" are literally fair game.

cathg, Not really. The case where the guide dog was attacked clearly endangered the the blind lady- though thankfully she was not hurt; the point is she could have been, there are clear grounds for a criminal prosecution under the Dangerous Dogs Act. In the case of the cat being killed: unless a human, present at the attack on the cat, felt themselves to be endangered by the dog, then the DDA is of little use. I believe there is other civil legislation where the dog owner could be prosecuted for their dog not being under control in a public place- but it is tricky.

Y'man, There are no rules with regard to owning a pure Stafford. Pure Pit bulls or Pit bull crosses are illegal under the Dangerous Dogs Act, unless registered,neutered, muzzled and under control at all times. Proving a dog is a Pit bull type as opposed to a Stafford is hard to do. My condolences to the cat owner. Truly awful. If the same dog is regularly off lead and has killed other cats it may be possible to bring some legal action on the grounds that it is not under control, otherwise there are grounds in civil law.

????, Well said. Let them take the spin elsewhere 'cos it no longer washes with this forum.

If playing with fireworks and fire is a rite of passage then it is not "kneejerk" to assume that hooded youths might be responsible for a spot of arson too, particularly when you've observed a group of said youths playing with fire very close to and at the same time as, the crime in question.

POT, Eh, how do figure that? Have you read my posts?

Someone correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't the new PR bowling pavilion burned down a few years ago and wasn't a tree on PR also set on fire? Also wasn't a teenage boy badly hurt on PR a year ago by messing around with fireworks or something similar? I'm with Curly Karen on this, let's not just dismiss this stuff as perfectly understandable rites of passage for youngsters.It does sound as though the cafe fire was kids "messing around". Curly Karen saw enough first hand to make that a reasonable conclusion.

Hi PR, Of course we must all talk politics, that's okay and just what this forum is for, as you say, all of life is political -with a small p. It's just if you are a politican, with a big P, whether active or seriously would-be, then I just don't entirely like that stuff being all mixed up with the views of us regular punters. So, a dedicated section would keep everything cleaner and clearer.

Slightly off topic but relevant: could we have a dedicated politics/soapbox section so that those forumites who are already politicians or looking to stand can take their various "lines" to one area? I just don't feel that comfortable with general threads being mixed up with politics, with a capital P, and party speak.

No and no again to controlled parking!

What mass hysteria? It makes sense for relevant organisations and authorities local to the area to be made aware that it is possible a young person in their care is exhibiting unusual and undesirable sexual behaviour- unless you are suggesting that masturbation at the railings of a children's play area is par for the course for many teenage boys? The sooner he is identified the better for him; letting people know is a great way to achieve that end sooner rather than later.

I agree if you need to go and nothing else is available it's sometimes unavoidable. My primary point was that there was absolutely no attempt to be discreet, for instance there were trees they could have gone behind, literally feet away. It was also clear to them that I was approaching, but I was given a full frontal view nonetheless. As I said, I'm no prude, it just seemed a bit odd given the age of the boys concerned. Anyhow, I don't want to detract from the main point of the thread which is this boy's inappropriate sexual behaviour. I do hope for his sake that he is identified and given help sooner rather than later. His whereabouts at the time of committing the act may be coincidence but extremely worrying if not. At any rate he needs to be counselled that his behaviour could land him in big trouble later as an act of indecent exposure.

Its a rather different issue but since this incident has been raised I just thought I'd mention that over the summer when out walking in Dulwich Park I had two boys of this age urinate quite openly as I was passing. They were with a football team and supervised by adults. I don't want to seem like a prude but, given their age- they were quite big lads- it didn't feel quite right. They made no attempt to be discreet or to turn away from me. I had a word with the men supervising who shrugged their shoulders.

Louisa, Are you really a Louisa in real life or are you a Julie? Your eye-watering posts would give a certain Ms Burchill a run for her money. Can't help but love em!