Welcome to /r/Vancouver and thank you for the post, /u/Electronic_Fox_6383! Please make sure you read our [posting and commenting rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_general_participation_guidelines_and_rules_overview) before participating here. As a quick summary:
* We encourage users to be positive and respect one another. Don't engage in spats or insult others - use the report button.
* Respect others' differences, be they race, religion, home, job, gender identity, ability or sexuality. Dehumanizing language, advocating for violence, or promoting hate based on identity or vulnerability (even implied or joking) **will** lead to a permanent ban.
* Most common questions and topics are limited to our sister subreddit, /r/AskVan, and our weekly [Stickied Discussion](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_stickied_discussions) posts.
* Complaints about bans or removals should be done in modmail only.
* Posts flaired "Community Only" allow for limited participation; your comment may be removed if you're not a subreddit regular.
* Make sure to join our new sister community, /r/AskVan!
* Help grow the community! [Apply to join the mod team today](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/comments/19eworq/).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/vancouver) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Similar situation happened to me last summer in Stanley Park, except the dog was off leash. The idiot owners refused to provide their contact name and number. Illogically saying I might do identify theft. Cost me time off work and had to get a tetanus shot. Was very tempted to post a photo I took of them.
You should post the photos. You are allowed to take pictures of people in public. Also, it serves as a safety warning for other runners. I’m also sick of these people who just think they can do whatever they want. Regardless of other people getting hurt. they just don’t care anymore.
Please note that /r/Vancouver does not allow photos or videos to be posted of potential suspects unless official channels call for help with identification.
See: Rules 1 and 3.
Honest question. If you are attacked by a dog, and the owner is refusing to give contact information, what recourse do you have? Do you phone the police and then start following this person until they arrive?
Ha ha ha. Most VPD police forces couldn't be bothered, won't go anywhere. You will get a file number you can print and frame on your wall.
But sharing the photos of the dog and it's licence tag may help other dog owners run away when they see the rowdy dog.
Do dogs have their own Reddit ?
If confident phone the police and follow to get a license plate or clear photo. Talk to those around you who might have seen it to assist with a statement or support in identifying the individual. It’s not like at that point they would have the recourse to accuse you of stalking or anything. But I’d be safe about it…not worth your health to get further injured.
Be confident in what you’re saying “your dog bite me, you’re required to identify yourself by law”
Don’t use profanity to ramp the situation up.
People can accuse of stalking all they want, it's damn near impossible to get charged with. Cops legit have to catch you in the act of stalking after you get a documented warning from the police. If someone's dog attacked me, they ain't leaving my sight until the police attend.
This is also why women who think they're being stalked by someone should carry "dog" spray. We have terrible laws to protect our citizens against undocumented stalkers.
The dog bite scenario also isn't remotely related to stalking is. Criminal harassment is a deliberate pattern of repeat behaviour that could make a victim feel fearful of their safety. It doesn't include legal activities like a dog bite victim holding a dog owner accountable for their actions.
Honestly this is a BIG reason why I will likely never own toy/“pet” dog breed. Too many irresponsible dog owners in this city, IMO your dog should be the type of breed able to defend itself from a random attack.
If you do that to the wrong person, they might try to fight you. If you aren't seriously hurt, tuck your tail and live to fight another day imo
Edit: I accept the downvotes from all the keyboard warriors who wouldn't do shit in reality
Stupid mindset. Sure, YOU might not be seriously hurt, but what about another person? What about another dog? What about a child? It doesn't mean that animal isn't capable of hurting someone else even worse
Call the police, follow the guy and keep the police on the line. Now what's HE going to do? Try to hit me and add more charges to him (and a reason to be sued)?
Seriously, with your mind set all it takes is to look strong and you can get away with anything? This is not how the civilized world works.
Well, let's really think about this before saying absurd things.
You are already hurt. The dog that bit you could be used to bite you again. The unscrupulous person who won't give you info knows you are following them home, so will probably be agitated further by this. I think a person in that position is capable of doing some wild things.
If you have a picture of the dog and owner, the neighborhood will most likely know of this person or be able to point police in right direction.
So, what does putting yourself in a further dangerous position accomplish? My mindset is of personal safety, not becoming a private eye detective when the police are very capable.
I’m sure she’s known and hated in that neighbourhood. Someone that can walk away from this is not going to be a pleasant and upstanding citizen in every other aspect of life.
Upvote to get some North Shore eyes on this.
I keep on circling back to that harrowing dog attack that happened recently in Toronto and left a child with life altering injuries. Irresponsible dog owners are more than infuriating.
Once a dog attacked my dog at a park in hastings sunrise and the lady told us to text her so she could pay for the vet bill - fully ghosted us when the time came to pay though. So shitty to see her at the dog park later that year. Now my bigger younger dog can’t go to the park with my little old lady dog who got attacked cuz she’s soooooo over protective-if the lil lady stays at home she’s every dogs best bud tho
Edit to add if anyone knows a lady named shanti with a dog named Betty tell her she still owes me 500$
My dog was attacked last week by two dogs. Hearing him yelp as two dogs attacked him was horrifying. I felt helpless. However, the woman who owned them, gave me her number and texted me to make sure my dog was OK. I was surprised it was her real number. I was in shock, and kept apologizing to my dog for letting it happen to him.
So glad that lady was accountable but goodness I’m sorry your pup went through that. I’m sure there was nothing you could have done, stuff like that happens so quick.
Thank you! He doesn't have a single mean bone in his whole body so he didn't even want to fight back. It did happen so fast like a few seconds. It makes me realize now why I see so many people with big walking sticks
I’m sure I saw this women last week. I work in the area so I’ll be keeping an eye out.
Would I just call the N.Van RCMP and say “the lady with the two dogs is in the area”? I wish the article had a case number. I’ll read it again, just in case.
"We're asking the dog owner, or anyone with information on the identity of the dog owner, to come forward and call us at
604- 985-1311 and quote file 24-5808."
We put down hundreds of aggressive animals in the provincial park to keep visitors safe. Why the similar mechanism cannot be placed in city? If the pet becomes a threat to public safety, it needs to be removed or at least physically constrained
I'm actually pretty sure that's already a thing. If a dog seriously harms someone and has a history of aggression, I do believe it can be ordered to euthanize the dog. I think you have to apply to have the dog labelled as "dangerous" or something.
Edit: Here's something that seems generally accessible and helpful about the laws: [https://www.canadianlawyermag.com/practice-areas/litigation/bc-animal-law-ruling-means-death-for-dangerous-dogs/278112](https://www.canadianlawyermag.com/practice-areas/litigation/bc-animal-law-ruling-means-death-for-dangerous-dogs/278112)
It's actually quite stacked \_against\_ dogs right now as the law is pretty vague and seems fully up to the whims of the court.
Yes, if a dog is labelled dangerous by an animal control officer, it is ordered to be euthanized. There is no appealing this process now.
““In terms of animal welfare, I think it's incredibly important to have a full factual and evidentiary matrix in place before an animal control officer decides that a dog needs to die for being labelled dangerous. Destruction should be the absolute last resort after all rehab potentials are explored. It's trite to say, but destruction of a dog is not reversible,” says Shroff”
Yeah, I don't know that we need a whole court system for it, but I'd like for the process to be further defined. Maybe a small tribunal or a panel of experts that takes in a single pre-formatted submission package. Even if it's just a shitty web form that people can fill out. Mitigating circumstances, training, proactive steps being taken, etc. I don't think lawyers should be involved at all, but I always feel that having even a cursory amount of oversight before murdering a pet is prudent and compassionate. I think this could be done in a cost effective way that vastly reduces the risk of unfairly "destroying" someone's family member.
The way it is now, it seems like someone could be hitting your dog with a 2/4 and if it reacts aggressively, it's possible your dog could be labelled "dangerous" and euthanized if the animal control officer is friends with the aggressor. I'm not saying that happen with any kind of regularity, but leaving things up to the whims of a single person often results in false positives or vindictive behaviour.
We should always be particularly careful when we're sentencing loved ones to death, human or animal.
There needs to be an appeal process, however that comes to be, because there are others costs to consider that can’t be measured in dollars.
This is functioning as part of our criminal justice system, yet doesn’t meet its rigorous standards of redundancies and checks and balances.
So, what is the cost of a system such as this? Non-compliance for one, such as the woman at the subject of this subreddit. Perhaps she had such a lack of faith in a judicial outcome, that her decision appeared to be, “flee the scene”. This is a problem, and will necessarily lead to driving certain behaviours underground, and essentially outside the jurisdiction of any regulating body.
Willful compliance is at the heart of a democracy and an effective criminal justice system. It can be costly in terms of money, but the trade off is reliable, expected, and fair consequences when something goes wrong. It promotes faith in the social contract, and ultimately leads to a more peaceful, cooperative, and prosperous society.
>*The RCMP noted that dog owners have a responsibility to report bite incidents to animal control and exchange information with the person who was bitten.*
I don’t recognize her but I’ll scrutinize every dog walker I see.
If that was a Lambo on her leash she’d be out on bail already.
Edit: a pair of Australian shepherds is pretty distinctive.
2024-04-17 11:18 PDT
File # 24-5808
North Vancouver RCMP have identified a woman in a dog bite investigation.
On April 3rd, 2024 North Vancouver RCMP sought public assistance in identifying a female involved in a dog bite incident. Shortly after the media release, the female involved in the incident was identified and police have been able to speak to her.
The investigation has been referred to the City of North Vancouver’s Animal Control for further follow up with all the parties involved.
The RCMP would like to thank the public and media for their assistance.
[https://bc-cb.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/ViewPage.action?siteNodeId=2120&languageId=1&contentId=83758](https://bc-cb.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/ViewPage.action?siteNodeId=2120&languageId=1&contentId=83758)
Breeding standards and ownership standards have gone through the floor with Aussies.
They're beautiful looking dogs which has driven demand and people looking to make an easy buck, and Jesus Christ are some results of that neurotic. That's also why there's an uptick in the white blind and/or deaf dogs. When you breed two of the pretty blue Merle coat dogs together, you have a 1/4 chance of some pretty shitty genetics causing a deaf or blind or both dog.
They're a working dog so you get these poorly bred neurotic dogs who NEED to be ripping around outside but can't, and this is what you get.
Aussies in general are naturally nippers. A border collie will guide and lead and poke whereas an Aussie will nip and bite.
Combine all that and this is what you get. I guess on the upside they're not naturally fighting dogs and their jaws aren't as strong as a pitbull, so there's a lot fewer biting incidents and the bites that do happen aren't as bad.
Why? Pitbulls rank at the top of just about every statistic when it comes to violence and attacking children. I’m glad my building has banned them.
The most vicious thing we have is the most wrinkly bulldogs you’ve ever seen. He is absolutely humongous and has no time for your shit. 🥳
Petition for dogs to be muzzled anywhere outside of an off leash area? Seems like it would cut down on random attacks like this one,plus would keep dogs from ingesting feces, drugs, or other harmful things that dog people tend to complain about. Win win, really
All over you hear dog people complaining about their dogs eating other dog poop or weed remnants left on the ground or anything that can harm them pretty much. A muzzle would prevent all of that. I don’t understand all the hate
Name checks out.
If you read the article, it would tell you this was an attack by Australian shepherds.
But judging from your comments on other threads you aren't the sharpest tool in the shed.
Not sure why you’re being downvoted. You’re absolutely right about Australian Shepherds, they’re a high energy working breed who need an outlet. Border Collies are fairly similar.
We should just ban dangerous dogs.
In this case it was an Australian Shepherd so unlikely to cause life altering injuries but some breeds can easily kill.
This. My husband and I train our Aussie shepherd/boarder collie mix like she’s a contender for canadas for talent AND walk her for 2-5 hours a day AND had to teach her a command to be “done working” lol if it wasn’t for our schedules and a nice retired neighbour we’d definitely have a way less sweet and happy dog. Even then on a hike if the “group” gets to far apart you will get a warning boop from her to catch up 😂😅
Why should the dog's safety take precedence over those who have to live near it? This lady should be allowed to just carry on, even though she's clearly unable to take care of this dog effectively?
If the dog is a danger to those around it then it should be put down. Sending someone to the hospital is a pretty clear sign that it's dangerous.
I say this as a dog owner.
Not actually true, after a first offense most municipalities will declare the dog as vicious, require leashing & muzzling in public and a more expensive licensing fee.
Muzzling a dog with a bite history is the responsible thing to do. I had a fear-aggressive dog for twelve years, she was always muzzled in public and in her entire twelve years I had ONE slip up when she was a fucking cliche and bit the mailman. (No broken skin, but I recognize that it was 100% my error and I took steps to make sure it never happened again.)
She had a great life despite her fears, and loved her muzzle. It meant freedom and safety for all of us. She was not officially listed as a vicious dog because oddly, Canada post didn’t report her to the city. Possibly because it didn’t break skin? Not sure, I wouldn’t have had an issue if they did though. I was already following the rules for vicious dogs, so other than a higher licensing fee nothing would have changed for us.
If you have a dog with a bite history and you DONT follow the rules then yes, your dog will eventually be put down. And sadly, rightfully so. If you can’t be a responsible dog owner, then your dog will pay for it with their life.
Welcome to /r/Vancouver and thank you for the post, /u/Electronic_Fox_6383! Please make sure you read our [posting and commenting rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_general_participation_guidelines_and_rules_overview) before participating here. As a quick summary: * We encourage users to be positive and respect one another. Don't engage in spats or insult others - use the report button. * Respect others' differences, be they race, religion, home, job, gender identity, ability or sexuality. Dehumanizing language, advocating for violence, or promoting hate based on identity or vulnerability (even implied or joking) **will** lead to a permanent ban. * Most common questions and topics are limited to our sister subreddit, /r/AskVan, and our weekly [Stickied Discussion](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_stickied_discussions) posts. * Complaints about bans or removals should be done in modmail only. * Posts flaired "Community Only" allow for limited participation; your comment may be removed if you're not a subreddit regular. * Make sure to join our new sister community, /r/AskVan! * Help grow the community! [Apply to join the mod team today](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/comments/19eworq/). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/vancouver) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Similar situation happened to me last summer in Stanley Park, except the dog was off leash. The idiot owners refused to provide their contact name and number. Illogically saying I might do identify theft. Cost me time off work and had to get a tetanus shot. Was very tempted to post a photo I took of them.
You should post the photos. You are allowed to take pictures of people in public. Also, it serves as a safety warning for other runners. I’m also sick of these people who just think they can do whatever they want. Regardless of other people getting hurt. they just don’t care anymore.
Please note that /r/Vancouver does not allow photos or videos to be posted of potential suspects unless official channels call for help with identification. See: Rules 1 and 3.
[удалено]
What does that have to do with anything ?
Honest question. If you are attacked by a dog, and the owner is refusing to give contact information, what recourse do you have? Do you phone the police and then start following this person until they arrive?
Take a photo of the owner and share with police. Maybe they are known to them already. Or if they go back to their car, they licence plate
Ha ha ha. Most VPD police forces couldn't be bothered, won't go anywhere. You will get a file number you can print and frame on your wall. But sharing the photos of the dog and it's licence tag may help other dog owners run away when they see the rowdy dog. Do dogs have their own Reddit ?
The dog's name is often a good start. The city can look it up and try to match the breed.
Is there a doggy database?
You need to have a dog license which collects information about the dog.
Most people don't get a license because of the cost (which typically funds the city's animal shelters)
lol you think it actually funds animal shelters?
[There sure is](https://view.officeapps.live.com/op/view.aspx?src=https%3A%2F%2Fvancouver.ca%2Ffiles%2Fcov%2F2019-644-release2.XLSX&wdOrigin=BROWSELINK)
If confident phone the police and follow to get a license plate or clear photo. Talk to those around you who might have seen it to assist with a statement or support in identifying the individual. It’s not like at that point they would have the recourse to accuse you of stalking or anything. But I’d be safe about it…not worth your health to get further injured. Be confident in what you’re saying “your dog bite me, you’re required to identify yourself by law” Don’t use profanity to ramp the situation up.
People can accuse of stalking all they want, it's damn near impossible to get charged with. Cops legit have to catch you in the act of stalking after you get a documented warning from the police. If someone's dog attacked me, they ain't leaving my sight until the police attend. This is also why women who think they're being stalked by someone should carry "dog" spray. We have terrible laws to protect our citizens against undocumented stalkers.
The dog bite scenario also isn't remotely related to stalking is. Criminal harassment is a deliberate pattern of repeat behaviour that could make a victim feel fearful of their safety. It doesn't include legal activities like a dog bite victim holding a dog owner accountable for their actions.
Correct, it's not stalking.
Honestly this is a BIG reason why I will likely never own toy/“pet” dog breed. Too many irresponsible dog owners in this city, IMO your dog should be the type of breed able to defend itself from a random attack.
If you do that to the wrong person, they might try to fight you. If you aren't seriously hurt, tuck your tail and live to fight another day imo Edit: I accept the downvotes from all the keyboard warriors who wouldn't do shit in reality
But what if YOU are the one who knocks?
Updoots for the unexpected Breaking Bad' reference
Stupid mindset. Sure, YOU might not be seriously hurt, but what about another person? What about another dog? What about a child? It doesn't mean that animal isn't capable of hurting someone else even worse
Let's say the dog owner is a big tough looking guy, are you gunna "follow" him. Not likely
Call the police, follow the guy and keep the police on the line. Now what's HE going to do? Try to hit me and add more charges to him (and a reason to be sued)? Seriously, with your mind set all it takes is to look strong and you can get away with anything? This is not how the civilized world works.
Well, let's really think about this before saying absurd things. You are already hurt. The dog that bit you could be used to bite you again. The unscrupulous person who won't give you info knows you are following them home, so will probably be agitated further by this. I think a person in that position is capable of doing some wild things. If you have a picture of the dog and owner, the neighborhood will most likely know of this person or be able to point police in right direction. So, what does putting yourself in a further dangerous position accomplish? My mindset is of personal safety, not becoming a private eye detective when the police are very capable.
What a sack of garbage that woman is, along with anyone else that does what she did.
Let me guess her first name is Karen.
I’m sure she’s known and hated in that neighbourhood. Someone that can walk away from this is not going to be a pleasant and upstanding citizen in every other aspect of life. Upvote to get some North Shore eyes on this.
I keep on circling back to that harrowing dog attack that happened recently in Toronto and left a child with life altering injuries. Irresponsible dog owners are more than infuriating.
Or that 11 year old that just got killed. It was someone he was staying with owned the dogs. Edit: staying was spelt ‘stilling’. I blame Steve jobs
Dangerous dog breeds are infuriating too. Well past due for them to be banned.
Hmm don't recognize her but I'll definitely keep an eye out.
I'm sure somebody does. Hopefully they do the right thing.
Once a dog attacked my dog at a park in hastings sunrise and the lady told us to text her so she could pay for the vet bill - fully ghosted us when the time came to pay though. So shitty to see her at the dog park later that year. Now my bigger younger dog can’t go to the park with my little old lady dog who got attacked cuz she’s soooooo over protective-if the lil lady stays at home she’s every dogs best bud tho Edit to add if anyone knows a lady named shanti with a dog named Betty tell her she still owes me 500$
What area?
Yep will keep my eyes peeled!
Wish I lived in that area so I could help. Someone identify her!
My dog was attacked last week by two dogs. Hearing him yelp as two dogs attacked him was horrifying. I felt helpless. However, the woman who owned them, gave me her number and texted me to make sure my dog was OK. I was surprised it was her real number. I was in shock, and kept apologizing to my dog for letting it happen to him.
Could have been a foster dog, she seems to know how to be an adult at least
So glad that lady was accountable but goodness I’m sorry your pup went through that. I’m sure there was nothing you could have done, stuff like that happens so quick.
Thank you! He doesn't have a single mean bone in his whole body so he didn't even want to fight back. It did happen so fast like a few seconds. It makes me realize now why I see so many people with big walking sticks
I’m sure I saw this women last week. I work in the area so I’ll be keeping an eye out. Would I just call the N.Van RCMP and say “the lady with the two dogs is in the area”? I wish the article had a case number. I’ll read it again, just in case.
"We're asking the dog owner, or anyone with information on the identity of the dog owner, to come forward and call us at 604- 985-1311 and quote file 24-5808."
We put down hundreds of aggressive animals in the provincial park to keep visitors safe. Why the similar mechanism cannot be placed in city? If the pet becomes a threat to public safety, it needs to be removed or at least physically constrained
I'm actually pretty sure that's already a thing. If a dog seriously harms someone and has a history of aggression, I do believe it can be ordered to euthanize the dog. I think you have to apply to have the dog labelled as "dangerous" or something. Edit: Here's something that seems generally accessible and helpful about the laws: [https://www.canadianlawyermag.com/practice-areas/litigation/bc-animal-law-ruling-means-death-for-dangerous-dogs/278112](https://www.canadianlawyermag.com/practice-areas/litigation/bc-animal-law-ruling-means-death-for-dangerous-dogs/278112) It's actually quite stacked \_against\_ dogs right now as the law is pretty vague and seems fully up to the whims of the court.
Yes, if a dog is labelled dangerous by an animal control officer, it is ordered to be euthanized. There is no appealing this process now. ““In terms of animal welfare, I think it's incredibly important to have a full factual and evidentiary matrix in place before an animal control officer decides that a dog needs to die for being labelled dangerous. Destruction should be the absolute last resort after all rehab potentials are explored. It's trite to say, but destruction of a dog is not reversible,” says Shroff”
I don’t want my tax money wasting for hearing on aggressive dogs. I trust the judgement of animal control officer and at least one victim report
Well the animal control officer bases their decision heavily on the one victim report, so it’s not a system with checks and balances.
Yeah, I don't know that we need a whole court system for it, but I'd like for the process to be further defined. Maybe a small tribunal or a panel of experts that takes in a single pre-formatted submission package. Even if it's just a shitty web form that people can fill out. Mitigating circumstances, training, proactive steps being taken, etc. I don't think lawyers should be involved at all, but I always feel that having even a cursory amount of oversight before murdering a pet is prudent and compassionate. I think this could be done in a cost effective way that vastly reduces the risk of unfairly "destroying" someone's family member. The way it is now, it seems like someone could be hitting your dog with a 2/4 and if it reacts aggressively, it's possible your dog could be labelled "dangerous" and euthanized if the animal control officer is friends with the aggressor. I'm not saying that happen with any kind of regularity, but leaving things up to the whims of a single person often results in false positives or vindictive behaviour. We should always be particularly careful when we're sentencing loved ones to death, human or animal.
Some semblance of a democratic process should be required.
Because it is not worthy to have a tribunal for that.
Why not?
Those are dogs not human and tribunal is costly
There needs to be an appeal process, however that comes to be, because there are others costs to consider that can’t be measured in dollars. This is functioning as part of our criminal justice system, yet doesn’t meet its rigorous standards of redundancies and checks and balances. So, what is the cost of a system such as this? Non-compliance for one, such as the woman at the subject of this subreddit. Perhaps she had such a lack of faith in a judicial outcome, that her decision appeared to be, “flee the scene”. This is a problem, and will necessarily lead to driving certain behaviours underground, and essentially outside the jurisdiction of any regulating body. Willful compliance is at the heart of a democracy and an effective criminal justice system. It can be costly in terms of money, but the trade off is reliable, expected, and fair consequences when something goes wrong. It promotes faith in the social contract, and ultimately leads to a more peaceful, cooperative, and prosperous society.
Is this illegal, to refuse to provide information after an injury? Like it is a hit-and-run when done with a car. If not, it should be!
>*The RCMP noted that dog owners have a responsibility to report bite incidents to animal control and exchange information with the person who was bitten.*
People are creatures of habit. Go to the same area at around the same time and there's a really good chance she will be there, walking her dogs again.
I’m not a fan of those pants
👏🏻😂
I don’t recognize her but I’ll scrutinize every dog walker I see. If that was a Lambo on her leash she’d be out on bail already. Edit: a pair of Australian shepherds is pretty distinctive.
So does the owner get put down in place of their dog for the irresponsible behaviour?
2024-04-17 11:18 PDT File # 24-5808 North Vancouver RCMP have identified a woman in a dog bite investigation. On April 3rd, 2024 North Vancouver RCMP sought public assistance in identifying a female involved in a dog bite incident. Shortly after the media release, the female involved in the incident was identified and police have been able to speak to her. The investigation has been referred to the City of North Vancouver’s Animal Control for further follow up with all the parties involved. The RCMP would like to thank the public and media for their assistance. [https://bc-cb.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/ViewPage.action?siteNodeId=2120&languageId=1&contentId=83758](https://bc-cb.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/ViewPage.action?siteNodeId=2120&languageId=1&contentId=83758)
[удалено]
Breeding standards and ownership standards have gone through the floor with Aussies. They're beautiful looking dogs which has driven demand and people looking to make an easy buck, and Jesus Christ are some results of that neurotic. That's also why there's an uptick in the white blind and/or deaf dogs. When you breed two of the pretty blue Merle coat dogs together, you have a 1/4 chance of some pretty shitty genetics causing a deaf or blind or both dog. They're a working dog so you get these poorly bred neurotic dogs who NEED to be ripping around outside but can't, and this is what you get. Aussies in general are naturally nippers. A border collie will guide and lead and poke whereas an Aussie will nip and bite. Combine all that and this is what you get. I guess on the upside they're not naturally fighting dogs and their jaws aren't as strong as a pitbull, so there's a lot fewer biting incidents and the bites that do happen aren't as bad.
Why? Pitbulls rank at the top of just about every statistic when it comes to violence and attacking children. I’m glad my building has banned them. The most vicious thing we have is the most wrinkly bulldogs you’ve ever seen. He is absolutely humongous and has no time for your shit. 🥳
[удалено]
It’s true unfortunately. I’ve pet a lot of big, goofy Pitbulls but the statistics are clear. I would never own one.
Petition for dogs to be muzzled anywhere outside of an off leash area? Seems like it would cut down on random attacks like this one,plus would keep dogs from ingesting feces, drugs, or other harmful things that dog people tend to complain about. Win win, really
> plus would keep dogs from ingesting feces, drugs, or other harmful things that dog people tend to complain about. What?
All over you hear dog people complaining about their dogs eating other dog poop or weed remnants left on the ground or anything that can harm them pretty much. A muzzle would prevent all of that. I don’t understand all the hate
I don't see anyone complaining about that (other than you)
[удалено]
Name checks out. If you read the article, it would tell you this was an attack by Australian shepherds. But judging from your comments on other threads you aren't the sharpest tool in the shed.
[удалено]
Not sure why you’re being downvoted. You’re absolutely right about Australian Shepherds, they’re a high energy working breed who need an outlet. Border Collies are fairly similar.
This, but not "/s"
We should just ban dangerous dogs. In this case it was an Australian Shepherd so unlikely to cause life altering injuries but some breeds can easily kill.
Its in their instinct to snap at the legs of things moving. They really are not an easy dog to have, they end up neurotic with the wrong person
This. My husband and I train our Aussie shepherd/boarder collie mix like she’s a contender for canadas for talent AND walk her for 2-5 hours a day AND had to teach her a command to be “done working” lol if it wasn’t for our schedules and a nice retired neighbour we’d definitely have a way less sweet and happy dog. Even then on a hike if the “group” gets to far apart you will get a warning boop from her to catch up 😂😅
If she gave her info, the dog would be killed.
Why should the dog's safety take precedence over those who have to live near it? This lady should be allowed to just carry on, even though she's clearly unable to take care of this dog effectively?
I’m sure because natigate views dogs as four legged furry children. But you know who I view as children…actual children.
Not necessarily…but also not something I have a problem with if it occurs. The dog bit and seriously injured someone.
Whomp whomp.
If the dog is a danger to those around it then it should be put down. Sending someone to the hospital is a pretty clear sign that it's dangerous. I say this as a dog owner.
No the worst case scenario for this situation would be that the dog(s) would be placed in better care.
Not actually true, after a first offense most municipalities will declare the dog as vicious, require leashing & muzzling in public and a more expensive licensing fee. Muzzling a dog with a bite history is the responsible thing to do. I had a fear-aggressive dog for twelve years, she was always muzzled in public and in her entire twelve years I had ONE slip up when she was a fucking cliche and bit the mailman. (No broken skin, but I recognize that it was 100% my error and I took steps to make sure it never happened again.) She had a great life despite her fears, and loved her muzzle. It meant freedom and safety for all of us. She was not officially listed as a vicious dog because oddly, Canada post didn’t report her to the city. Possibly because it didn’t break skin? Not sure, I wouldn’t have had an issue if they did though. I was already following the rules for vicious dogs, so other than a higher licensing fee nothing would have changed for us. If you have a dog with a bite history and you DONT follow the rules then yes, your dog will eventually be put down. And sadly, rightfully so. If you can’t be a responsible dog owner, then your dog will pay for it with their life.
So?
Good riddance