first mate

TonyQuinn, Sorry, I must object to your implication that many dog owners behave in this irresponsible way- a bit like inferring the same of most car owners whenever there is an accident. Most dog owners do not behave this way, the irresponsible dog owner behaviour is down to a significant minority who make a big impact. Please note that the dog in question is NOT a pitbull but an American Bulldog. I would hate to see an example like this used to institute dog control orders across our parks- that would be a disaster for all us many, many responsible dog owners.

It would be good if some political pressure could be brought to bear on the police to take an incident like this seriously and not just file it away as another "dog fight". For many of us law abiding dog owners walking in the park has become a decidedly unrelaxed affair- because we are always having to look out for dodgy owners with their bull breed accessory. What a shame that we cannot have more of the old fashioned park wardens back- actually on patrol, visible and there when you need to report something. I know funding is an issue but all I will say to that is this would be a better use of money on its way to "brighten up" the Northcross Road wall etc.. etc.. Feeling safer in the park would brighten up my day no end. Emily, I am so glad Woody's prognosis is good, you'll get plenty of support from the ED dog peeps if you make it back to the park, but gently does it.

I am fairly certain I know this guy- longish grey/white hair, slimmish build, medium height (Irish accent?|). I believe his dog is an American Bulldog or cross. Though this is not a banned breed they are not for the faint-hearted. They do indeed have a strong prey drive and fighting instinct and without extremely careful training and socialisation they are likely to go after other dogs. Unlike Staffs and Pitbulls they also have a strong guard instinct and so could represent a problem to people too. In my view this man has loaded the dice further by foolishly keeping his dog entire- so you have a very large powerful male dog with a strong fighting/prey drive roaming Peckham Rye offlead. Whenever I have seen this dog in the distance I have avoided it like the plague, not for my sake but for my dog. Ditto any other bull/molosser breeds that are entire males or that I do not know. When will people learn that these breeds are a liability with other dogs and therefore potentially with people, should they try to intervene in a fight. When will people learn too that if you keep an entire male, of whatever breed, you have an additional responsibility to your own dog and to other people's. If the owner of the Daschie felt in any intimidated by this dog, fearful that they might get bitten (before they intervened) or just plain scared for their own safety then they may have grounds for prosecution under the DDA. Otherwise there are areas of dog law in the civil courts that can be pursued. I have watched this dog develop over the last few years. The owner never seemed to have much control over it and I was alarmed to see also that he had not castrated it- in my view this attack is the inevitable result of irresponsible/ignorant ownership. I do woner if this owner ever properly researched his breed and knew exactly what he was taking on. Sorry, I meant to say also how devastating for the owner of Woody I hope he recovers to full fitness. You were in NO way to blame by having your dog on the lead- again this is an excuse used by cretins when they cannot control their own dog- and his dog was not under control (yours was which is why there may be a case under the DDA). If this man knew (and the fact that he used it as an excuse is a giveaway) that his dog is likely to attack other dogs when they are on a lead then he should never let his off a lead- not under any circumstances. Someone may have a young pup not ready to be let off that they are walking in the park, another may have a bitch in heat, another may have an ill, elderly or injured dog. All of these will be on a lead in the park at some point- all have a right to feel safe from dogs that are in the habit of attacking other dogs on lead. Please pursue legal action against this guy- he should not be allowed to keep a dog.

"Don't try to keep up with the Jones', drag them down to your level." Quentin Crisp

Again, leave the wall as is. It's fine. I cannot stand the idea of areas being given a fresh "identity" by council and community committee- you just feel that the end result will be a series of compromises- bland and tacky. Still cannot understand why this is an "ishooo" at all. I cannot ever recall seeing graffiti on this wall. Can Councillor Barber give times and dates of offending graffiti? Concentrate the funding on getting the paving sorted, I say, so fewer of us trip whilst on our way to peruse market goods.

No line for five days. Eventually fixed. Problem was damage after bad weather to local exchange.

No thanks. Ghastly waste of money. It's an odd place for a 'work of art'-this looks nothing of the sort. Why not just erect a large perspex box, stick it to the wall and let budding artists display a new work every month?

womanofdulwich, These people sound a bit of a disaster to be honest. If the dog is barking/crying continuously it does not take a genius to work out that it is distressed. Anyhow, no use me venting here. Probably the best contact is Bobs Broadbent at Dog Knows. She's based in SE6 and is APDT registered as well as having other behavioural qualifications. being a professional though she will have to be paid. Her contact details are: Website: http://www.dogknows.co.uk Email: bobs@dogknows.co.uk Tel: 07867507774 Dog Knows and Puppy School, based in South East London. Specializing in resolving puppy problems and training kind reward based methods. Puppy and Dog Training, Problem Solving, Dog Walking and Puppy Care. Pre-vaccination Puppy Consultations Puppy School training and socialisation classes - vaccinated to 20 week old puppies Home consultations to give advice, or for if you have a puppy trouble or dog behaviour problem Private training programmes for puppies and dogs Exercising and Puppy Care service Pre-vaccination Puppy Consultation Puppy Training and Socialisation Classes Private Puppy & Dog Training Puppy Troubles Solved Dog Behaviour Consultations Puppy Care and Dog Walking Address: London, London, SE6 4XN UK I hope this helps. If, as I suspect, they are not the kind of people to spend money on their pup/dog then please come back. I would have a word with them about the pup barking. I don't understand why it is left out for two hours. If it is being properly exercised etc.. according to it age, it could be left inside, in a puppy pen, where it would happily sleep for two hours. If it is older it could be going through a teething phase and being destructive, but there are ways round this and if they are responsible dog owners who properly considered a taking on a puppy, they should have known what to expect and how to deal with it. Please keep us updated and well done to you for being concerned. Unless this is sorted I can see another dog heading to rescue.

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?