My Husky Killed My Cat

[wvdisluv2]

OP~I am so sorry, heartbreaking I, as an experienced dog owner, will never judge a dog by its breed....ever. However I will educate myself on the breed I am considering

 

[Pea-n-Me]

It's not just pulled out of the air.

I never said they were pulled out of the air. But I do think statistics can be flawed, for reasons I've already stated.

I do think it's sad you'd pass me over, but I know you don't know me. I do come with good references.

 

[cocodog]

So sorry to hear this. We recently adopted our 4th dog-- a beautiful and sweet young weimaraner. She was very rough with our mini-dachshunds, however (in a playful but very strong way!), and we had to make the tough decision to return her to the Weim. rescue. My daughter wept on the way home, and it almost killed us all, but I know it was the right choice to keep our other pets safe. Good luck with your decision- making. {{{{{HUGS}}}}}

 

[DMRick]

I never said they were pulled out of the air. But I do think statistics can be flawed, for reasons I've already stated.

I do think it's sad you'd pass me over, but I know you don't know me. I do come with good references.

I'm not sure that these are actual statistics, but a gathering of payouts by the insurance companies. These dogs may not bite the most, but do the most damage when they do bite.

Yes, I understand I might pass up some good homes, but in the end, it's what I can live with.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

From the National Canine Research Council

Dog Bites

What is a Dog Bite?

The question seems simple enough. Most of us would describe a dog bite as an incident where a dog deliberately inflicts an injury to a person. Animal control and public health departments, however, consider any incident in which a dog’s tooth or nail breaks a person’s skin, regardless of the circumstances or any characterization of the dog’s intention, to be an animal exposure that merits their notice. Therefore, animal control and public health departments classify all of the following animal exposures as dog bites:

Nips from playful puppies
Scratches from a dog’s nail
Scrapes from a dog’s tooth
Accidental bites by dogs
Bites to canine professionals that may have occurred under extreme duress, such as when the dog was in pain or otherwise unable to control its behavior (e.g. a vet tech bitten while removing intubation tube from a dog’s throat)
Good Samaritans bitten trying to assist injured dogs (e.g. dogs hit by cars)
Bites by working K-9 dogs in the performance of police duties
What About Dog Bite “Statistics” or Dog Bite Numbers?

Dog bite statistics (that is, animal exposure totals) do not give an accurate picture of which dogs bite, why dogs bite, or of the frequency of canine aggression.

One of the primary functions of animal control continues to be determining whether domestic animals involved in biting incidents have up to date vaccinations for rabies. Hence their interest in all animal exposures, regardless of the circumstances.

However, a form used to record an animal exposure, probably called a bite report, will usually include space for a description of the circumstances. Did a dog scratch his owner during a playful romp? Did a dog chase and bite a child riding a bicycle?

Unfortunately, when animal exposures are tallied up, they are released to the public as simple bite numbers. The circumstances of the incidents have been stripped away. In consequence, bite numbers are not an accurate representation of canine aggression, which is, in itself, a general term that is applied to range of different behaviors.

Bite numbers become even more misleading when subdivided by breed descriptors. Recent research has confirmed that it is impossible to breed label dogs of unknown history and genetics solely on the basis of their appearance. And at least half of the dogs in the United States are mixed breed dogs! Nevertheless, animal controls and shelter workers continue to assign single breed descriptors to mixed breed dogs.

Even if visual breed identifications were accurate, dog bite tallies still would not provide evidence that some breeds bit more frequently than others. Specialists who analyze dog bite tallies have pointed out that breed populations within a given jurisdiction are not known; therefore, incident rates cannot be calculated.

However, the most serious flaw with dog bite tallies remains that incidents evidencing different canine behaviors are assigned the same statistical value.For instance, a report that four dogs assigned the breed descriptor “A” inflicted bites may actually be a condensation of the following:

Dog One jumps up and scratches a child with its nail.
Dog Two is hit by a car and critically injured and bites the hand of a rescuer.
Dog Three chases a child on a bicycle and nips the child’s ankle.
Dog Four lunges and inflicts a serious bite to a child’s face after the child comes too close to the dog’s food bowl.

Even if the breed descriptor were accurate, which a recent study points out is unlikely, each of these incidents involves distinct canine behaviors that animal experts would not describe in the same terms.

http://nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/dog-bites/

If experts cannot ID dog breeds, how can cities?


By Bill Johnson, Denver Post Columnist
December 16, 2009

So you think you know about dogs?

Sorry, you do not.

I break this news to you only because I got put to such a test Tuesday, along with about two dozen animal-shelter directors, volunteers, dog trainers and others who make a dog-related living.

The task was simple: View 20 dogs on a videotape and identify each one. Is it purebred or mixed? If believed a mix, what is the mixture of each?

How hard could it be?

All I know about dogs, I quickly learned, is that one lives with me. Of the 20 dogs shown, I got the breed correct one time, but only because it looked like Lupe, my mutt.

I did only slightly worse than the professionals.

“I was completely wrong. I probably got three to four out of the 20,” claimed Laurie Buffington, a Berthoud dog trainer, as we left a classroom at the Longmont Humane Society.

“Think you can tell just by looking?” was the teaser for the breed identification study we participated in. It was run by Victoria L. Voith, a professor of animal behavior in the College of Veterinary Medicine at Western University in Pomona, Calif.

What I and the others ultimately learned is you cannot simply look at a dog and know what it is.

Shelter workers, she explained, are generally 75 percent wrong when they list or tell you the breed of a dog. The only sure-fire way of knowing, she said, is DNA testing.

“I started this study,” Voith said, “because I am a lover of German shepherds and was appalled that every short-haired breed with brown hair was called a German shepherd. It simply isn’t so.”

Outside of the Lupe-looking Chihuahua-mix, I thought every dog looked like a pit bull or a shepherd-mix.

“So what in the hell is Lupe?” I jotted in frustration in my notebook about halfway through the session. I was not getting even remotely close.

My favorite of all was the 20th dog, a three-legged cutie that had been thrown from a car. She was not the English sheepdog I suspected, but a shih-tzu. Everyone else misidentified her too.

Through her work, Voith hopes to put to the lie two things: studies on which dogs bite the most, and the wisdom of municipal breed-specific bans, such as Denver’s, where hundreds of suspected pit bulls have been put to death.

“Visual identification simply is not in high agreement with DNA analysis,” she said when I protested that a dog I had falsely, dead-to-rights identified as a pit bull turned out through DNA testing to be mostly Dalmatian. “Dogs in Denver may be dying needlessly,” she said.

She hopes that her work, which she expects to be published in a year, will better inform cities and statistics gatherers on breeds most likely to bite.

“We really don’t know yet. I don’t think we have ever really known,” she said.

The professionals all walked out scratching their heads, each mumbling something akin to “that was very informative!”

“I always thought I was really good at identifying breeds,” a chastened Shantel Southwick, another Berthoud trainer, moaned. “And cities are killing dogs based on uninformed visual identification? That’s pretty scary. It’s heartbreaking, really.”

[Victoria Lea Voith, PhD, DVM, DACVB, is a Professor of Animal Behavior at Western University.]

Excellent article, I won't post the whole thing

When you look at dog bite statistics vs breed keep in mind that these studies often conveniently leave out small dogs. Small dogs do not cause severe injury, and rarely even cause minor injury. However, small dogs are a prime example of WHY dogs attack in the first place and are often recognized as yappy little biters. It's called "Small Dog Syndrome" where a small dog has been coddled, babied, and otherwise treated as if it were a human infant or child, its owner's "baby". As many owners of larger dogs do, small dog owners have a tendency to treat their cute little pups as if they were their own children, applying human reasoning and logic to their behaviors and then are surprised when their little dog becomes extremely possessive and aggressive even toward friends and family members. Again, humans often fail to realize that treating a dog in this manner reinforces dominant, aggressive, possessive, or fearful behaviors, all of which often times lead to some form of "vicious" behavior. It's cute when a chihuahua jumps up and down, clawing at your legs for attention. It isn't cute when a lab tries it, and it isn't tolerated for most medium to large dogs. However, allowing this behavior in a small dog, however cute and amusing it may be, has the exact same effect it has on any other dog. Small dogs are still dogs, but many people fail to remember that. These same people fail to recognize that when the dog finally bites that it is the owner's own doing for allowing the dog to escalate. And to think that a small dog cannot inflict serious damage or even kill is a dangerous assumption. In October 2000 a pet pomeranian (a 6 lb dog) attacked and killed a 6 week old baby. In February 2002 a jack russell terrier mauled an infant.

This is an important fact to keep in mind when reading bite statistic rankings. Pit bulls, rottweilers, german shepherds, dobermans, and akitas are on the list, usually near the top. However, since few people report small dog bites because they are mild and rarely taken seriously, the statistic results are obscenely skewed and offer a very slanted view of the entire picture. One only sees larger breed statistics. According to an anonymous animal shelter poll terriers and cocker spaniels are responsible for most of the bites they experience or hear about. Roughly 1 out of 5 dachshunds bites or attempts to bite. The ever-popular fashion accessory Chihuahua is also a widely known "vicious" breed. It's also widely known that Jack Russel Terriers can be obstinate and downright aggressive.

Again, because most dog bites are not reported then statistical evaluations of dangerous breeds are skewed and misleading. A chihuahua likely isn't going to cause any real damage, and likely neither will a dachshund or cocker spaniel. However, the fact that many small dogs are unintentionally allowed to develop aggressive and possessive behaviors, and that owners often unwittingly nurture fearfulness or dominance in their little babies is why small dogs have such a nasty reputation as mean little things. The same behavior is often applied to larger breeds with the same results. However, allowing a medium-to-large sized dog behave in the manner that many small dogs are allowed to can have extremely dangerous, possibly life-threatening results, and those results are the ones that make headlines and fuel breed bans and misleading statistics.

Did you know huskies are listed by the CDC in the top ten most dangerous breeds list? Did you also know that by "husky" they do not refer specifically to the Siberian Husky, the only recognized breed by that name? It also refers to malamutes, samoyeds, and just about any other northern spitz breed that resembles a husky in shape or markings. Somebody with little knowledge of dog breeds and temperaments designed rules based on flawed statistics. Your ability to receive homeowner's insurance can be affected by these same flawed statistics. Many homeowner's insurance companies use the CDC's list of dangerous breeds to determine which breeds they cover. Many of the breeds do not refer to a specific breed, but to a recognized "type" of dog. Pit bulls can be one of up to 20 different breeds of dog that vaguely resemble the American Pit Bull Terrier in appearance. Husky can be one of any breed or mix that shares a passing resemblance to the Siberian Husky or Alaskan Malamute. You can be denied homeowner's insurance based on what your dog looks like.

Further skewing the statistical evaluations and their results is the fact that victims are often the ones left with the responsibility of identifying the breed that attacked them if the dog cannot be located. In the heat of an attack you can't honestly expect a distraught person to correctly analyze the shape of the dog and make an accurate guess as to its breed. If the owner is located they may misidentify their dog due to an inability to correctly identify their dog's breed or mix of breeds. Even animal shelters and humane societies do a terrible job at breed identification. I see pit bulls listed as lab mixes all the time. My own alaskan husky once escaped and got picked up by animal control. The shelter told me if he'd gone unclaimed he'd have been listed as a shepherd mix despite the fact that he is very clearly and obviously a husky. Anything with a black snout is automatically labeled a shepherd mix. I've seen sled dogs listed as greyhound mixes. People very, very commonly misidentify dog breed or breed mixes. I knew a black and tan alaskan husky that could easily have been labeled a doberman even though there wasn't any doberman in the last several generations of his pedigree.

Any large, thin dog with a passing resemblance to Scooby Doo can be labeled a great dane. Fuzzy dogs are often mislabeled as chows or chow mixes. Many breed mixes resemble an entirely different breed altogether. I know somebody with two labrador/bulldog mixes. Both dogs look like pit mixes but do not have the breed anywhere in their bloodline. They are the result of an accidental breeding between two pure bred pedigreed dogs. Many people can't tell the difference between a husky, a malamute, a wolf, and even an akita. How can one expect bite statistics and breed risk to be even remotely accurate, then?

Schnauzers, cocker spaniels, dachshunds, and even labs cause their own fair share of bites. Call up your local vet and animal shelters and ask them which breeds give them the most trouble.

http://www.seefido.com/dog-discussi...about-dog-bite-statistics-t10740.html[/QUOTE]

 

[Pea-n-Me]

Some new thinking is on the horizon

Breed Regulation

Toledo replaces breed specific law with one aimed at responsible pet ownership.

October 13, 2010 — The Toledo City Council last night approved a breed-neutral overhaul of regulations concerning dogs and their owners that establishes steep fines for dog bites, replacing the breed-specific ordinance which Toledo Municipal Court Judge Goulding found unconstitutional in January. While the old law dealt primarily with setting restrictions on “pit bulls” and “pit bull” mixes, the new, forward-thinking rules are aimed at promoting responsible ownership and do not discriminate by dog breed.

Toledo’s new ordinance:

• Sets fines for unprovoked dog bites that escalate from $150 to $500 to $1,000, and can include mandatory pets-ownership classes or community service with an animal-welfare group.

• Creates new “level one” and “level two” threat classifications for nuisance and dangerous dogs.

• Mandates sterilization at the owner’s expense for dogs caught running at large more than once.

• Bans chaining up dogs outside for more than an hour, and not at all if the owner isn’t home.

• Prohibits dogs from being left unattended for more than 24 hours.

The Council also voted to amend the penalties for killing or injuring animals that are based on monetary value and replacing them with a uniform, first-degree misdemeanor charge for the killing or injury of a domestic animal or a farm animal. Councilman Ludeman said the new penalties were inspired in part by the experiences of Sarge, an East Toledo dog identified as a German Shepherd who survived six gunshot wounds this summer. Police have charged Sarge’s owner and the owner’s friend of taking turns shooting him in a backyard cage.

 

[DMRick]

All of these dog articles by the canine research council (so, do they have less in the ring than the insurance companies?) are well and good..however, again, the dogs on the insurance lists are the pay outs. The ones that HAVE done enough damage to report and the insurance companies to pay out. Most of the maulings around here..where children have had their insides ripped apart, have not been from a pomeeranian or a jack russell. I never said they didn't bite or do damage, but they have not been the cause of enough payouts to make the insurance companies put them on the list. Of course there are exceptions both ways, small breeds that bite, large breeds that don't, but if I was going to be walking down the street and a dog breaks loose from it's owner, I'd sure rather it be a pom, if it's going to attack me, than one of the large breeds on the list.

As for telling the type of dog, I don't know of a single person who would not know the difference between an English Sheepdog and a shih-tzu. unless they picked people who are never around any dogs (or perhaps wouldn't know the difference between a raccoon and a cat)...the size is pretty different. If they were to show someone a pickture of both and tell them which is which, they would then be able to identify which attacked them. Just as if someone showed me a ford truck and a chevy car, and told me which is which, I would be able to tell them which car/truck hit me.

You are right, statistics can be skewed, however when a dog tears apart a kid and is found, when the rabies test is done, those people do know the different breeds, and while it may not be a full breed, it is enough of one breed for them to know what it is.

 

[DMRick]

October 13, 2010 — The Toledo City Council last night approved a breed-neutral overhaul of regulations concerning dogs and their owners that establishes steep fines for dog bites, replacing the breed-specific ordinance which Toledo Municipal Court Judge Goulding found unconstitutional in January. While the old law dealt primarily with setting restrictions on “pit bulls” and “pit bull” mixes, the new, forward-thinking rules are aimed at promoting responsible ownership and do not discriminate by dog breed.

"

And this does not mean that there won't still be an insurance list. It just means as I read it, that when your dog bites the fine is the same for all breeds, as it should be. Apparently they had a backwards law in place.

 

[goofy4tink]

I haven't read the entire thread...and if I'm repeating something, I apologize. One thing that can be tried is to leash the dog at all times. He needs to be socialized with the cat. The cat should have free range, not the dog. Do NOT put the cat somewhere else and allow the dog to roam at his leisure!! That only reinforces the dog's thinking that he is 'supreme' in the hierarchy.
Keep the dog leashed, with you in control, at all times. Immediatly correct him if he shows aggression towards the cat. Allow him to interact with the cat, but never agressively. If he does, he gets corrected. Try this for awhile. If that doesn't work, you may have to rehome him.
All dogs are capable of aggression...all of them. I have the most gentle golden retriever on the planet. But, if pushed too far, he will turn and snarl and snap....and if he does, he is usually justified.
There are certain behaviours that are in dog dna....pure and simple. They are not our 'babies' or 'humans'...they are animals. And way too many people forget this. And that's where trouble starts.

 

[kimmar067]

....wow, when my cat 9-lb cat was still alive, she made sure to remind my 75-lb sammie who was BOSS in the house.....sorry to hear of your loss - I almost lost my furbaby this week, but thank goodness she is recovering nicely at the vet's after a serious operation....you really have to consider what's best for your kitty and weigh out the pros and cons....GOOD LUCK!

 

[Pea-n-Me]

All of these dog articles by the canine research council (so, do they have less in the ring than the insurance companies?) are well and good..however, again, the dogs on the insurance lists are the pay outs.

You are missing my point. The information the insurance company has on the "type of dog" they're paying out on is only as good as the information they're given by others. And that information is clearly not always accurate, nor are all dog bites even reported to insurance companies.

statistics can be skewed, however when a dog tears apart a kid and is found, when the rabies test is done, those people do know the different breeds, and while it may not be a full breed, it is enough of one breed for them to know what it is.

I don't know of a single person who would not know the difference between an English Sheepdog and a shih-tzu.

Really? I know many - even people with dogs. But it's really a moot point because it's already been shown (not only by one researcher, but many) that if even a veterinarian/doctorate level animal behavior specialist who wrote the above article, If experts cannot ID dog breeds, how can cities?, has difficulty, then we cannot assume the rest of us will be completely accurate.

And this does not mean that there won't still be an insurance list. It just means as I read it, that when your dog bites the fine is the same for all breeds, as it should be.

I stopped posting articles but could have posted way more. (Hopefully people found the articles interesting and informative.) But if you look around, there are articles from countries all over the world who have now had time to analyze the "bad breed/breed banning" data enacted in recent times, and all have simultaneously found that breed specific legislation simply doesn't work to cut down on dog bites. Again, it gives a false sense of security. What does work is owner education and responsibility. So from what I can see with my own research into the matter, things will be changing to more common sense laws such as the one the reasonable people of Toledo have enacted.

 

[DMRick]

You are missing my point.

[clip]

So from what I can see with my own research into the matter, things will be changing to more common sense laws such as the one the reasonable people of Toledo have enacted.

Actually, you missed my point, but there is no sense in going back and forth on this. I have many years experience to go by and I'll continue to count on my experience and the experience of those I trust. I've seen up close and personal the damage some of the dogs on the insurance list have done, and since we have also put some of those dogs down for their misdeeds, I know what breeds they were (which is why I think Cocker Spaniels should be added to the list). These aren't dogs that bit and ran, so someone might have gotten the breed wrong. These were dogs brought in after the mauling and identified.

As for the "common sense law" that was changed, that was an entire different issue. It was talking about how people are fined if their dog bit someone. They were an unusual county, that fined depending on the type of dog a person owned. It was a stupid law they originally had and has no bearing IMO on what we were talking about..dogs that the insurance company have deemed do the most damage when someone is mauled or killed. If a county has a fine in place for a dog biting someone, it should never have mattered what type of dog they had.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

Actually, you missed my point, but there is no sense in going back and forth on this. I have many years experience to go by and I'll continue to count on my experience and the experience of those I trust. I've seen up close and personal the damage some of the dogs on the insurance list have done, and since we have also put some of those dogs down for their misdeeds, I know what breeds they were (which is why I think Cocker Spaniels should be added to the list). These aren't dogs that bit and ran, so someone might have gotten the breed wrong. These were dogs brought in after the mauling and identified.

As for the "common sense law" that was changed, that was an entire different issue. It was talking about how people are fined if their dog bit someone. They were an unusual county, that fined depending on the type of dog a person owned. It was a stupid law they originally had and has no bearing IMO on what we were talking about..dogs that the insurance company have deemed do the most damage when someone is mauled or killed. If a county has a fine in place for a dog biting someone, it should never have mattered what type of dog they had.

We can agree to disagree, but I think you have an narrow viewpoint and rigidity that I hate to see in animal work.

I do apologize if this offends because I'm sure you're a good person, but I do have to be honest here.

 

[DMRick]

We can agree to disagree, but I think you have an narrow viewpoint and rigidity that I hate to see in animal work.

You are welcome to your opinion. I think you are wrong, and that's my opinion. I'm a lover of both animals and children..but the children who have been mauled (and any future children and pets) get my first consideration over a dog. I'll always go on the side of caution because of my experience. If I appear rigid because I agree with the insurance companies claims, based on my own personal experience, then so be it. It is my experience, and that's what I am going by. I really only posted originally, that people might want to check their insurance, to make sure they are covered, in case they own one of these dogs on the list..so as to not lose their homes or savings, if sued. Thats a fact.

I feel bad for the OP, who didn't appear to have any warning about the breed she adopted.

Since no one else seems interested in what we are discussing, I'm dropping this. I don't want it to get personal, and being told I have a narrow viewpoint and I'm rigid is making it personal. You have no idea what time and money I have invested in being involved in the saving of animals.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

You are welcome to your opinion. I think you are wrong, and that's my opinion. I'm a lover of both animals and children..but the children who have been mauled (and any future children and pets) get my first consideration over a dog. I'll always go on the side of caution because of my experience.

I hope you don't assume that you're the only one who has experience or loves children. I can say the same.

Suffice it to say we both have experience, though we come from different perspectives, and both love children.

You may work with animals who've been through the worst of the worst that pet ownership can bring. I don't know if the situations you've described ever really analyzed what went wrong in the first place. It sounds to me as if some dogs are doomed simply because of their appearance, or "breed". Not looking at the situation and/or people that created the crisis in the first place. Just go out and get another dog, but be sure to get one that's not on the List. That will solve all the problems.

Whereas education is what I'm always going to do - if not to help the situation at hand, to try to help owners prevent it from happening in the future.

This is where the differences between not only us, but among researchers, legislators, animal workers and medical doctors, etc, lie. To ban, or to educate? To assign blame to the breed, or to the people owning the breed? That is the question.

In the case of the OP, I do think that, as in the Cesar Millan article, the young Husky probably was not trained nor contained, or had his energy regulated, etc, and it had disastrous results for the cat, unfortunately. This is not a problem unique to the OP (or her DD or DD's boyfriend), it's a very common problem. I think the OP tried to make the best of a bad situation (DD buying dog for boyfriend, moved from home to home, etc, which I've seen happen in my own family as well ) and do the right thing by the dog (which I commend her for) but she apparently didn't know some of the high level information that it takes to really make a safe, happy home for cats, dogs and people together. And I do say it's high level because it is extremely common for people not to know these things. Come on, you've got to agree to that!

What I took exception to (and how this thread got OT in the first place), is the notion that Huskies are an aggressive breed, are terrible with cats, yada, yada, yada. Many people, including myself, have shown that it's possible to have "bad breeds" and cats together harmoniously if there's thought and action involved ahead of time. And I will add that, as I said at the beginning, even with the best training and socialization and the best behaved dog or cat, etc, things can go wrong and bad things can happen, which is why we can't become complacent in thinking that all is fine all the time - common sense and supervision always need to be part of the equation.

 

[Fantasmic23]

So sorry for your loss.

 

[DMRick]

The difference between you and I, is I just see us as having different opinions. You accused me of a narrow viewpoint and being rigid because my opinion is different from yours.

I don't know if the situations you've described ever really analyzed what went wrong in the first place. It sounds to me as if some dogs are doomed simply because of their appearance, or "breed". Not looking at the situation and/or people that created the crisis in the first place. Just go out and get another dog, but be sure to get one that's not on the List. That will solve all the problems.

No one said that at all (to go out and get another dog, just not one on the list). The dogs were not doomed (put down) because of their appearance, but because of what they did. I doubt it was analyzed over why a certain dog did damage to a child or pet (we've had quite a few of them in our area). And I can't think of a single case in our area, where they weren't on the "list" although I'm sure there are some. Should they have been trained ahead of time..sure, hindsight is good. All dogs should be trained, but they aren't going to be.

I really can't see the point in arguing about this on this thread. We each see this differently. Obviously, I'm not alone in this, as there are plenty of arguments from people who agree with this "list", or that have had bad experiences with these dogs, or there woul dnot have been any laws or lists against them. If you want to discuss it further, I suggest a PM, because I'm done.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

If you want to discuss it further, I suggest a PM, because I'm done.

I do not need to PM you to discuss further. This whole thread is a discussion.

Maybe others have learned from our discussion, regardless of whether they agree with you, or me.

That's really what it's all about.

 

[daisax]

I agree that the dog should be rehomed. It was a tragic situation for the cat and your family, but it is not a sign that the dog is a vicious creature who can't be trusted around people. It's a sign that he's an animal -- specifically a dog. People tend to assume that all dogs should love all the other furry creatures, and the fact is, it's a wonder that any of them do. A wonderful fact, but not something we should take for granted. Generally speaking, a puppy brought into a home with an older cat who will put it in its place when it's young enough and small enough will end up okay with at least THAT cat, but introducing adult cats and dogs is always a dicey situation.

Kittens are stupid..they will tease the heck out of a big dog and run..and the dog runs after them.

That's another aspect -- kittens may taunt dogs without realizing it, and adult cats may taunt dogs out of a mistaken sense of security. One friend of mine was taking care of another friend's dog. She had some kennel runs in the yard for the dogs to hang out in and get fresh air during the day (they lived in the house). Well, the local feral cat was in the habit of parading past the kennels, making all the dogs bark hysterically. But he knew he was safe, because they couldn't get out.

Only nobody told the visiting dog, and when the cat strolled in front of the kennel he went THROUGH the chain link door (which was securely clipped on the opening side -- he took it off its hinges on the other side). Got to the cat and shook him up. My friend came running and rushed the cat to the emergency room, but it was too late. This was an 8 year old dog who never had a problem before (or after) with his own cats. Being dog people, my friend was deeply saddened (it was a feral cat but she'd been trying to gain its trust), but she knew it was a perfectly reasonable behavior from the dog's perspective. The dog lived another 3 years and to the best of my knowledge never harmed another living creature.

As for the "lists" -- I have a breed (boxers) that is starting to appear on lists because when it WASN'T on the lists, that's the breed that people would put on their dog licenses when registering their pit bull. Not that I'm demonizing pit bulls, but just pointing out that between deliberate disinformation on the part of owners and lazy, uninformed designations assigned by witnesses and even shelter/animal control officials, it's a wonder anybody knows what anything but a purebreed rough collie is.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

Since no one else seems interested in what we are discussing, I'm dropping this. I don't want it to get personal, and being told I have a narrow viewpoint and I'm rigid is making it personal. You have no idea what time and money I have invested in being involved in the saving of animals.

I see you edited this in after I read your original response.

Actually, I was talking about your viewpoint, and mentioned at least a couple of times that you do good work and I'm sure are a good person.

You did lose me on the cat, though.

Again, I know you work hard in your animal work. I do as well. Many others here do, too. It's all good. And it's ok to disagree on concepts. That's what's nice about a discussion board. I know nobody else is responding, but I also know that the information presented was good, and that someone, somewhere, somehow, took something away from it that will ultimately benefit an animal, a person or both. Heck, I learned a few things as well. Knowledge is power.