Tiger attacks boy in Elgin

[mykee]

Pikachu, with regards to your post about 6 or so back, I was not referring to insurance companies not insuring you if you have a 'choice breed' I was simply implying that if a 'list' of sorts was produced in black and white, by say the Humane Society of Canada, Dogs in Canada or the CKC (a respected medium) simply listing on a scale, which dogs are more prone to bite, nervousness, aggression, temperment around children from cases which have occurred, I believe that a list of this sort would stop the thoughtless purchasing of dogs on a whim which is very prevalent today.

[V.hb]

The size of lizards is 2 metres, not 1.

[annieb_mice]

Someone mentioned having a "Canine Good Citizen" test to determine whether the dog has a good temperament or not. There ARE such tests, one with the CKC for registered purebred dogs and the Temperament Test for any unregistered dog. Personally I think ALL dogs should go through these tests as it would give the owner a better idea if there is anything that might trigger the dog's aggressive response so they can take proper preventive measures. These tests have a variety of different "Scenes." Some of the scenes include a "crowd" scene where a group of people stand around the dog, then move in towards it; a loud bang or gunshot; an umbrella opening suddenly in front of the dog; an aggressive stranger; a neutral stranger; along with a variety of other scenarios. I have had a variety of dogs go through these tests and with the exception of one they all passed. The one that failed was a blue heeler/lab cross who, even after extensive training and such, was very aggressive towards anyone who tried to approach me. She was a wonderful dog in the home, but I finally decided to put her down as I knew she could never be trusted outside. I think her brain was wired wrong or something... :P
Concerning the issue of muzzles, if such a law was ever put into place where ALL dogs had to be muzzled for public safety, I would not hesitate to muzzle my dogs when they are out. I am a FIRM believer in Obedience training and both of my dogs have been trained. They are also crated when I am not home. When they are leashed and out for walks, they are NOT allowed to run free, and are always at my side.
When my dogs are home, they are free to roam through the house, including my animal rooms. My younger one actually helps me "catch" any mice or rats that might be loose by pointing them out to me and putting a paw on them so they don't get away. With the exception of the occassional dead pinkie, neither of my dogs have ever tried to go after any of my other animals, and believe me, they sure have the chance often enough! I allow my rabbits and chinchillas to exercise in my living room, always with me there to make sure they don't chew on anything. The chins and rabbits quickly learned that both dogs are great "toys" and love to jump on them and "play" with them. Before anyone comments, I NEVER leave the dogs alone with the "loose" animals.
Yes, I realize that I might be a little "harsh" with my dogs, but I want them to stay safe. I don't want anyone to have the chance to blame THEM for something just because of their breed.
Anyways...
About the tiger incident....
There is NO way anyone, even "Arnie," could possibly hold back a full grown tiger on a leash! There is a HUGE difference between a "wild" animal and a "domesticated" one. While we all disagree on what types of dogs are more aggressive, I think we can ALL agree that dogs, regardless of the breed, are DOMESTICATED animals, where a tiger is not. Dogs, cats, cattle, horses, ect have been bred by humans for thousands of years. Tigers have not. Perhaps in the distant future ALL animals could be considered "Domesticated" but that is certainly not the case now.
One last thing.... I fully agree with the statement that a snake is a lot LESS dangerous than a dog. EVERY dog has the potential to bite, some breeds having the potential to cause very serious damage. But there is NO comparison to a leopard gecko or even a ball python! Most of the common "pet" reptiles can't do even half the damage that a small poodle or chihuahua is capable of. I've been bitten by a chihuahua and a boa constrictor. I'll take a boa's bite anyday over that damn chihuahua! LOL! Heck, even a RAT can do more damage than most of the common snakes! We're all aware of how much damage even a small rat can do to a snake.
Anyways... I'm gonna stop rambling here cause my meds are starting to kick in... LOL! <Oooh... look at all the purty colours!>
Take care
Annie B. <:3 )~~

[Ixidor]

I didn't read the whole post seeing as its so long and I have very little time so, what my point was is people way back were saying it all depends on the dogs owners and how they were treated. In herpetology we have what we call "mean" snakes, this is just an example of animals even if they are bred and treated very nicely in captivity. Fact is people, some animals are just plain mean! Its there instincts as animals to be aggresive. Thats just one of the reasons I won't go near a pitbull, its in their instincts

[Ixidor]

btw I agree that some pitbulls are angels, call me stupid, im afraid im truly afraid and even though some pitbulls are nice not all are and these stories about disfiguring scars on peoples faces from them doesn't help

[anacondaman]

that is the best example ive herd since the post started ixidor.....which brings me to another...corn snakes bite sometimes too

adam

[mykee]

Annie; it was me who mentioned the Canine Good Citizen program. As a dog lover, don't you think it was a little harsh to put a dog down that was aggressive out of doors? Would a haltie not have solved that problem or the dog going to a home that had more experience with obedience training or more time to deal with the problem? My dog is aggressive with strangers in or out of the house, (mind you, they're only strangers for 32 seconds) and it would never even cross my mind to put her down.

[Ixidor]

Or you could have just kept him inside.....

[meow_mix450]

see thats the problem these days everyone is getting a bad impression on these pitts and rotts, but i bet every here that owns one will say they are very friendly and is almost like every dog, maybe more agressive. But some owners will disagree. I personly have not touched or held a snake, im afraid of them. This is cause of the media and what i see on tv. Maybe im wrong, maybe snakes arnt that bad at all, i cant really judge them cause i have never had one before, but once i do my opinion will probly change about snakes, same goes for dogs, once you own a pitt or a rott, youll probly have a different opinion

Meow

[mykee]

Well, I own 'A' dog, and from what I've witnessed with my own eyes and read, I personally, would never own one of those breeds. Good point though. However, if you're afraid of snakes, why would you own one? Fear is usually bred out of ignorance; simply not having any concrete information. I'm afraid of spiders. I don't hate them, nor do I call for their extermination, I have no interest in learning about them, and am therefore rather laissez-faire about them as a whole. Now with regards to these dog breeds, I do not fear them, I've been in contact with all of them. From that personal experience, I chose to make an educated choice to never own one. Fear and educated choices are two very different things.

[meow_mix450]

o no no no, i didnt say i hate snakes, i just have a fear about them. Fear of getting biten. But once i learn about them, and maybe handle them, ill have a different opinion, and over come my fear.

Meow

[mykee]

Meow, that was my point exactly.

[reptiguy123]

Ahem. Tigers. Tigers! Lol.


“My Lab would nip at people where my PB won't.”
Ouch!

“i WISH people had to be licenced to own pitts, staffs, rots...”
Now that is kind of discriminating. Licenses for all dogs or for none!

“btw I agree that some pitbulls are angels, call me stupid, im afraid im truly afraid”
Snake and spider fearers are not alone.

[Pixie]

Originally posted by Cruciform
Have you ever worked on a farm? Or regularly worked in an environment with guard dogs?

I've seen people who were seriously injured by both. Horses that attempt to kill anyone who comes within reach of their hooves and teeth. Dogs who can only be approached by one person. Cows that are nervous and if even the slightest noise scares them, kick you, and trample you into the dirt.

You should NEVER let a child near any animal without direct supervision, even something as small and "harmless" as a cat.

If the tiger has been socialized he's no more dangerous to the average person than an aggressive breed of dog, yet people often leave their kids alone with the family pet all the time. Hell, people buy Dalmations for their kids because of the Disney movies, and they're one of the worst breeds to leave with small children.

I grew up working with large animals. Even docile, domesticated species are deadly in the right situations. Often unintentionally.

Just because a species is a predator does not make "attacks" predatory. They will do things to people that would not harm their own kind, yet do devastating damage to our flesh. A cuff to warn someone off, or a bite across the "scruff" to discipline.

So I reiterate. Putting the child within reach of a tiger, dog, or horse without proper safeguards in place is equally irresponsible.

I have never "worked" in an environment with large animals or on a farm. I have however had many experiences with different animals throughout my life and have picked up a little from that over the years as well as from other informed sources.

The only thing that I "contest" in your post is that you seem compare the danger of exposing a child to a tiger versus a large dog or horse equally.

This is where I say that it's an unfair to compare these animals together. Had you said iguana, alligator, croc, lion, llama, dingo, hyena, etc. I wouldn't have objected. But you are comparing distinctively a wild animal to domesticated ones.

I'm not saying that dogs and horses aren't dangerous, to the contrary they can be. They sure as heck ain't as dangerous as tigers!

By your explanation, with just proper training, we'd be able to have safe and tiger pets. I don't think so. Even the best and most experienced trainers will tell you that you can never trust them completely and you can't take stupid risks like exposing them to children or any other inexperienced persons.

The biggest flaw in your comparison is the particular choice or animals you chose: dogs and horses. If you just think of it statistically, the times humans have been in contact with tigers and been injured and the times humans have been in contact with dogs or horses and been injured, the numbers would surely show the difference clearly.

Humans have had long histories or having strong relationships with canines and equines. The reason for these species having been "chosen" is their high social adaptability. To accept the dominance of humans in their life. They were also adaptable enough to learn to interact with us enough to work together. This type of relationship just isn't seen with the large majority of other species, including large felines.

Sure some tigers can be taught to do tricks but it is completely against their nature to behave this way. Sooner or later it might and most likely will resort to their wild nature.

In both dogs and horses, the subordinates (beta and lower ranks) all answer to the alpha of the group. This very nature in these species are what made them so able to be what they are today. There are centuries of selective breeding in the horses and dogs we see today for those reasons, a far cry from the tiger found in zoos and private collections.

Having said all that, I do understand that you are trying to explain that dogs and horses can be just as dangerous to us. The truth is they can be and are sometimes. Almost 100% it's our fault through bad ownership or bad breeding selections.

I'm going to bed now, my head hurts.

Pixie

[pikachu]

oops! sorry mykee!
good point though.
i think anyone who reads into what breed of dog they want will generally be able to figure out what breed they should get.
if they go to a REAL breeder, the breeder will definately be able to tell them.
when i got my pooch i read every article i could about what i might expect.
having a staff/ border collie mix is a lot of work!
they contantly test you, give them an inch they take about 5000 miles!
thats why i thing anyone that wants to own strong temperment dogs should need a license and training.
dogs that are bred to protect tend to mature later than retrievers and such, sometime up to 4-5 yrs! guard dogs need to be trained through out their lives, not just puppy school.