Deer mauled by dogs at Hampshire beauty spot (From Daily Echo)

Deer are pests,they cause damage to crops and gardens,they cause traffic accidents,large numbers are a threat to the environment. Only in this nimby country would someone care about a deer on a day when a 93 year old pensioner died in hospital after being beaten in her own home as she slept.

Afghan's are sighthounds bred to chase on sight, so they were doing what comes naturally to them, deer are a natural prey species, I see no problem in that. Of course .243 is good medicine for over population of deer, the harvest tastes good and is heathier than beef!

Deer have a right to exist and not be killed by killer dogs let loose by idiots
As for the killer of the old lady I hope they rot in hell

Wow what a lovely bunch you are. Deers are beautiful peaceful creatures and have a right to graze without being mauled to bits by peoples dogs. Irresponsible dog owners!!!!

I disagree; dogs and irresponsible owners are the real pests here. Dogs attack sheep,chickens and livestock. With some luck the attacker of the old lady will be dealt with by the strong arm of the law,and punished, where as the wretched dogs will be allowed to savage more wild life and livestock! The wild life has been here for a millennium or so, does it not have an equal right to roam this land without being senselessly mauled to death?

Humans also cause plenty of traffic accidents on a daily basis and in large numbers are a threat to the environment

In the good old days if you hunted the Kings deer you got hung or deported.
What a shame that is gone for ever

i'm afraid you're wasting your time trying to get dog owners to obey any controls, especially when they have the backing of morons like Bigfella777 (Bigfella, tiny intelect) and Niel.

Dogs should be able to do what they want, where they want. Livestock, deer, wildlife, people...it matters not. Of course, if an uncontrolled dog gets bitten by after terrorising an adder then all the adders should be murdered as well.

Everybody may as well just give up and accept that all Nature Reserves are dog exercise areas and toilets. End of.

If it were me i would suggest the wildlife trust reinstate a few sheep (if they aren't there already) and also employ a trained marksman to gun down any uncontrolled dogs that worry them. Perhaps then they'll keep them on a lead...but i doubt it.

bigfella777 wrote:
Deer are pests,they cause damage to crops and gardens,they cause traffic accidents,large numbers are a threat to the environment. Only in this nimby country would someone care about a deer on a day when a 93 year old pensioner died in hospital after being beaten in her own home as she slept.

So what you're saying is, if something worse has happened, then we should forget about the lesser things? By your logic, we shouldn't care about the 93 year old pensioner, either, considering the thousands of dying children elsewhere in the world.

You do have some strange ideas.

Owners need to take responsibily, simple as that. I have had 2 dogs run into the side of my car causing hundreds of pounds worth of damage because it wasnt on a lead when it was supposed to be. Owner didnt even apologise, fine the owners.

bigfella777 wrote:
Deer are pests,they cause damage to crops and gardens,they cause traffic accidents,large numbers are a threat to the environment. Only in this nimby country would someone care about a deer on a day when a 93 year old pensioner died in hospital after being beaten in her own home as she slept.

You post the same dull thread on at least 2 stories hoping to get a reaction. Well done, you succeeded, hopefully you can now focus on getting a life.

bigfella777 wrote:
Deer are pests,they cause damage to crops and gardens,they cause traffic accidents,large numbers are a threat to the environment. Only in this nimby country would someone care about a deer on a day when a 93 year old pensioner died in hospital after being beaten in her own home as she slept.

You have definitely got to be the biggest ar*ehole to ever post on this site!!! There is no hope for this world whilst 'pests' like you exist too!!

voicein the croud wrote:
Deer have a right to exist and not be killed by killer dogs let loose by idiots
As for the killer of the old lady I hope they rot in hell

I think you will find that everything has a right to live and that includes "killer dogs". All dogs are killers along with all cats, insect eating birds, most fish, dolphins, whales and on and on and on. Dogs may be domesticated but they are still dogs and still retain many natural traits. I suppose you could blame humans for intervening and keeping dogs but if humans didn't intervene the dear would still be having to deal with wolves roaming the country. Lets get a grip on the facts here. One dear was killed by dogs. I wonder if anyone would care to find out how many are killed on the roads each year, how many are shot for food and how many have to be killed to save them suffering in old age as they no longer have any natural predators.

Ok perhaps I wasn't clear, the dogs did what they did as it's their natural instinct, honed by selective breeding, their prey is just that. I don't agree with people letting their dog's loose, but often they are unaware of the dogs instincts. Deer maybe 'pretty', but they are a pest unless controlled, of course natural controls could be reintroduced, wolves would be a good choice perhaps?

SLINKYBABE wrote:
Wow what a lovely bunch you are. Deers are beautiful peaceful creatures and have a right to graze without being mauled to bits by peoples dogs. Irresponsible dog owners!!!!

Quite so - deer should be shot and eaten.

It turns out that all of nature revolves around animals attacking other animals. Getting upset over this is somewhat pointless.

Niel wrote:
Ok perhaps I wasn't clear, the dogs did what they did as it's their natural instinct, honed by selective breeding, their prey is just that. I don't agree with people letting their dog's loose, but often they are unaware of the dogs instincts. Deer maybe 'pretty', but they are a pest unless controlled, of course natural controls could be reintroduced, wolves would be a good choice perhaps?

Generally speaking, mankind has not done a wonderful job of adjusting ecosystems. We just don't seem able to predict exactly what side-effects introducing a new animal to one will have.

Georgem wrote:
It turns out that all of nature revolves around animals attacking other animals. Getting upset over this is somewhat pointless.

That's fine then. You're right - it's nothing to do with the principal, just the actual act. In which case, i recommend we let loose a pack of aggressive dogs in your house in the hope they attack you.

Getting upset over that would be somewhat pointless apparently.

throatwarbler wrote:

Georgem wrote:
It turns out that all of nature revolves around animals attacking other animals. Getting upset over this is somewhat pointless.

That's fine then. You're right - it's nothing to do with the principal, just the actual act. In which case, i recommend we let loose a pack of aggressive dogs in your house in the hope they attack you.

Getting upset over that would be somewhat pointless apparently.

Nice. I say something you don't like, your response is to set attack animals on me. Disproportionate, perhaps? Let me guess: that comment should have me hanged by the neck until dead.

Ha ha ha we hav'nt had wolves in this country for a long time. And I think some of you are missing the point. This place is a nature reserve!! Not for irresponsible dog owners to rip shreds out of the local wildlife that people go to enjoy!. These dogs are supposedly
"domesticated" dogs not " wild" dogs!!!

As normal this forum has attracted the usual set of impassioned and polarised view-points and stupid arguments that make no sense at all.

Deer are a lovely sight to some people and a pest to something g of a minority, farmers perhaps, but deer are allowed onto the nature reserve as are the sheep.

Dog walkers are another group of people who feel threatened by legislation due to an irresponsible and downright dangerous few imbeciles. I know all about this feeling – I am a cyclist.

Dogs should not be allowed to run free if they are trained to or even likely to attack or kill animals, wild or otherwise. This is obvious to normal minded people. Dogs of this nature may well not distinguish between deer, sheep, other dogs or children.

I was attacked once by a large dog, it was a cross between a Rhodesian ridgeback and an Alsatian. I did nothing to provoke the attack and the owned could not prevent it despite his best efforts. I can tell you that it was an appalling experience, I am a big strong man and was able to fight back but not without nasty injuries. I reported the incident to the police because I was worried about children or the elderly, who would have likely been killed if it had happened to them. The owner, who is responsible, now muzzles the dog and keeps it on a lead in public, rightly so.

Anyone who thinks it is OK for their dogs to ravage and attack animals, at will or on order, in a public space should be prosecuted and not allowed to keep animals. In fact they should probably be caged themselves. I take my children to St Catherine’s hill myself and it is a beautiful spot; thinking of a pack of attack dogs being let loose in an area where people go for a nice walk makes me shudder.

As for the poor pensioner, that was dreadful, and I think we all hope the perpetrators are caged soon too but it has nothing whatsoever to do with what happened on St Catherine’s hill.

Georgem wrote:
It turns out that all of nature revolves around animals attacking other animals. Getting upset over this is somewhat pointless.

Nature in the wild sense revolves around animals attacking other animals,it is part of the natural food chain.Dogs and cats are domesticated animals,that are supposedly fed by their owners,so consequently do not need to kill to survive.
If you are saying that is is a natural instinct for certain dogs to chase and kill the likes of deer,them surely they should never be let off a lead,or confined to the owners garden,and if the garden is not of sufficient size,then don't have a dog.

Urbane Forager wrote:
As normal this forum has attracted the usual set of impassioned and polarised view-points and stupid arguments that make no sense at all. Deer are a lovely sight to some people and a pest to something g of a minority, farmers perhaps, but deer are allowed onto the nature reserve as are the sheep. Dog walkers are another group of people who feel threatened by legislation due to an irresponsible and downright dangerous few imbeciles. I know all about this feeling – I am a cyclist. Dogs should not be allowed to run free if they are trained to or even likely to attack or kill animals, wild or otherwise. This is obvious to normal minded people. Dogs of this nature may well not distinguish between deer, sheep, other dogs or children. I was attacked once by a large dog, it was a cross between a Rhodesian ridgeback and an Alsatian. I did nothing to provoke the attack and the owned could not prevent it despite his best efforts. I can tell you that it was an appalling experience, I am a big strong man and was able to fight back but not without nasty injuries. I reported the incident to the police because I was worried about children or the elderly, who would have likely been killed if it had happened to them. The owner, who is responsible, now muzzles the dog and keeps it on a lead in public, rightly so. Anyone who thinks it is OK for their dogs to ravage and attack animals, at will or on order, in a public space should be prosecuted and not allowed to keep animals. In fact they should probably be caged themselves. I take my children to St Catherine’s hill myself and it is a beautiful spot; thinking of a pack of attack dogs being let loose in an area where people go for a nice walk makes me shudder. As for the poor pensioner, that was dreadful, and I think we all hope the perpetrators are caged soon too but it has nothing whatsoever to do with what happened on St Catherine’s hill.

Perhaps those who complain about irresponsible dog owners would be happier if dogs were not kept as pets at all, but just allowed to roam in wild packs. Natural state of things restored... everyone happy...???

Errrr completley missing the point!! Perhaps dog owners should just be a little more responsible and NOT let their dogs act like wild dogs in packs!!

Urbane Forager wrote:
As normal this forum has attracted the usual set of impassioned and polarised view-points and stupid arguments that make no sense at all.

Deer are a lovely sight to some people and a pest to something g of a minority, farmers perhaps, but deer are allowed onto the nature reserve as are the sheep.

Dog walkers are another group of people who feel threatened by legislation due to an irresponsible and downright dangerous few imbeciles. I know all about this feeling – I am a cyclist.

Dogs should not be allowed to run free if they are trained to or even likely to attack or kill animals, wild or otherwise. This is obvious to normal minded people. Dogs of this nature may well not distinguish between deer, sheep, other dogs or children.

I was attacked once by a large dog, it was a cross between a Rhodesian ridgeback and an Alsatian. I did nothing to provoke the attack and the owned could not prevent it despite his best efforts. I can tell you that it was an appalling experience, I am a big strong man and was able to fight back but not without nasty injuries. I reported the incident to the police because I was worried about children or the elderly, who would have likely been killed if it had happened to them. The owner, who is responsible, now muzzles the dog and keeps it on a lead in public, rightly so.

Anyone who thinks it is OK for their dogs to ravage and attack animals, at will or on order, in a public space should be prosecuted and not allowed to keep animals. In fact they should probably be caged themselves. I take my children to St Catherine’s hill myself and it is a beautiful spot; thinking of a pack of attack dogs being let loose in an area where people go for a nice walk makes me shudder.

As for the poor pensioner, that was dreadful, and I think we all hope the perpetrators are caged soon too but it has nothing whatsoever to do with what happened on St Catherine’s hill.

Please define "attack dogs"? I would suggest that any dog could be trained to be an attack dog. These are most probably not trained to attack anything. I can't recall the last time I saw an Afghan Hound being used by any police force, private security company or any branch of the military. Now stop being a plumb. As an urban forager I would expect you to have at least one Lurcher to help you catch your rabbits for diner. Nasty attack dogs no doubt.

Skin the deer. Force owner to don the skin. Place owner at the exact same spot. Let owner's dogs loose on faux-deer. Dock one months wages from owner. I have spoken.

Higginz wrote:
Skin the deer. Force owner to don the skin. Place owner at the exact same spot. Let owner's dogs loose on faux-deer. Dock one months wages from owner. I have spoken.

Sounds more like you have broken wind.

Stillness wrote:

Higginz wrote: Skin the deer. Force owner to don the skin. Place owner at the exact same spot. Let owner's dogs loose on faux-deer. Dock one months wages from owner. I have spoken.

Sounds more like you have broken wind.

True. I rarely have anything useful to add to the conversation.

I think you made the best point so far Higginz, an eye for an eye and all that.

Let the dogs attack their owner and see how they like it.

Then they perhaps may think twice about putting it on a lead (if they are still alive that is)

Willy47 wrote:
I think you made the best point so far Higginz, an eye for an eye and all that.

Let the dogs attack their owner and see how they like it.

Then they perhaps may think twice about putting it on a lead (if they are still alive that is)

What a load of old rubbish. An eye for an eye, eh? Ok, so that spider you stepped on as a child, I guess we get a 300ft spider to stamp on your head. An eye for an eye and all that. That meat you eat: I guess you have to be cooked and fed to various chickens, cows and pigs. An eye for an eye and all that. The rabbit you ran over in your car that one time. Best we get a rabbit-driven car to mow you down. An eye for an eye and all that.

Willy47 wrote:
I think you made the best point so far Higginz, an eye for an eye and all that.

Let the dogs attack their owner and see how they like it.

Then they perhaps may think twice about putting it on a lead (if they are still alive that is)

An eye for an eye hey Willy. No room for reason in your world then? Have you ever seen the damage a dear can do to a tree? Perhaps any dear caught stripping bark from a tree should be skinned? An eye for an eye and all that. If you should ever happen to run over an animal I shall expect to see you sitting in the outside lane of the M27.

Georgem,it would appear you are one of the dog owning brigade that I have the misfortune to meet most day's in the New Forest,totally arrogant,and in total denial that their dog is responsible for anything.Personally,
I would ban all dogs from the New Forest that do not act in a responsible manner,plus impose a heavy fine on the owners of these dogs, it would send a message out to irresponsible dog owners,that most people who love the countryside,hate dog owners with attitude.

WOAH! SORRRYYYYYY Mr Perfect!

Do you spend your whole day on here or something?

Judging by the amount of posts you make you should consider getting out more rather than attacking everything people say on the daily echo website.

Stillness wrote:

Willy47 wrote:
I think you made the best point so far Higginz, an eye for an eye and all that.

Let the dogs attack their owner and see how they like it.

Then they perhaps may think twice about putting it on a lead (if they are still alive that is)

An eye for an eye hey Willy. No room for reason in your world then? Have you ever seen the damage a dear can do to a tree? Perhaps any dear caught stripping bark from a tree should be skinned? An eye for an eye and all that. If you should ever happen to run over an animal I shall expect to see you sitting in the outside lane of the M27.

Stillness,are you implying that some of your lady friends go around eating bark from trees,I should change your company,dear

bigfella777 wrote:
Deer are pests,they cause damage to crops and gardens,they cause traffic accidents,large numbers are a threat to the environment. Only in this nimby country would someone care about a deer on a day when a 93 year old pensioner died in hospital after being beaten in her own home as she slept.

I care 1 million times more about that old lady than a deer. I also care a lot about out of control dogs. I'm a mastiff owner & she is 100% aggressive toward other dogs due to her previous owner not socialising her, and she is damned hard work. I've tried so hard but its instilled in her & she's getting old now but I NEVER let her off a lead. Why were these afghans not trained to return on command? I bet you'd be on here bleating if your out of control dog got chunks taken out of it by a big dog on a lead because it has no idea about returning on command. Personally if people want to let their dogs run riot who charge into other dogs they should be left to face the consequences. You can't have it both ways.

Everybody just needs to calm down and breathe, shall we hold a funeral for the poor deer?

Would everyone feel better then?

Where in the world is this conversation going people?

Willy47 wrote:
WOAH! SORRRYYYYYY Mr Perfect!

Do you spend your whole day on here or something?

Judging by the amount of posts you make you should consider getting out more rather than attacking everything people say on the daily echo website.

Apology accepted. Why would I want to out more? I'm sat in my large private garden listening to the birds and enjoying the sunshine. I don't need to work as I saved hard so I could retire at 50 and now I spend all my time doing what I want to do as apposed to what I have to do. As a hobby I look after dogs, about 80 a year so I do have a bit of an idea on dog behavior and I much prefer it to many so called human being's.

long memory wrote:
Georgem,it would appear you are one of the dog owning brigade that I have the misfortune to meet most day's in the New Forest,totally arrogant,and in total denial that their dog is responsible for anything.Personally,

I would ban all dogs from the New Forest that do not act in a responsible manner,plus impose a heavy fine on the owners of these dogs, it would send a message out to irresponsible dog owners,that most people who love the countryside,hate dog owners with attitude.

Sorry to disappoint you, Sherlock, but I don't own a dog. Still, nice try.

long memory wrote:

Stillness wrote:

Willy47 wrote:
I think you made the best point so far Higginz, an eye for an eye and all that.

Let the dogs attack their owner and see how they like it.

Then they perhaps may think twice about putting it on a lead (if they are still alive that is)

An eye for an eye hey Willy. No room for reason in your world then? Have you ever seen the damage a dear can do to a tree? Perhaps any dear caught stripping bark from a tree should be skinned? An eye for an eye and all that. If you should ever happen to run over an animal I shall expect to see you sitting in the outside lane of the M27.

Stillness,are you implying that some of your lady friends go around eating bark from trees,I should change your company,dear

It's a fair cop gov. One to many Shandy's and a touch of sun stroke me thinks lol.

Willy47 wrote:
Everybody just needs to calm down and breathe, shall we hold a funeral for the poor deer? Would everyone feel better then? Where in the world is this conversation going people?

Its not about the deer, its about out of control dogs.

Long memory you may have, but reasoning skills are somewhat lacking. In your eyes, the world is apparently divided into two groups: people who agree with you, and dog owners. One of the oddest things I've ever read.

Georgem wrote:
Long memory you may have, but reasoning skills are somewhat lacking. In your eyes, the world is apparently divided into two groups: people who agree with you, and dog owners. One of the oddest things I've ever read.

''Long memory you may have'',

You weren't in any of those Star wars films where you?

Sorry Stillness i thought you had a vaild point, my response about getting out more was more aimed at GeorgeM.

I am a dog lover myself and much agree that they should be controlled and if they can't be and are a danger to the public (mainly small children)then worst case scenario they need to be put down.

As the point has already been made im sure that if that deer were a toddler out for a walk with their family then the dogs and their owners would feel very different about the situation. They were just lucky that THIS TIME it was only a deer.

Willy47 wrote:
Sorry Stillness i thought you had a vaild point, my response about getting out more was more aimed at GeorgeM.

I am a dog lover myself and much agree that they should be controlled and if they can't be and are a danger to the public (mainly small children)then worst case scenario they need to be put down.

As the point has already been made im sure that if that deer were a toddler out for a walk with their family then the dogs and their owners would feel very different about the situation. They were just lucky that THIS TIME it was only a deer.

Dogs tend to live with humans more often than they do with deer. Perhaps this is why they (normally) tend to see the human form as a resource rather than prey. I'm not taking the p**s, if you raised a pup in the company of deer it is more likely to protect rather than attack them.

Stillness wrote:

Willy47 wrote:
Sorry Stillness i thought you had a vaild point, my response about getting out more was more aimed at GeorgeM.

I am a dog lover myself and much agree that they should be controlled and if they can't be and are a danger to the public (mainly small children)then worst case scenario they need to be put down.

As the point has already been made im sure that if that deer were a toddler out for a walk with their family then the dogs and their owners would feel very different about the situation. They were just lucky that THIS TIME it was only a deer.

Dogs tend to live with humans more often than they do with deer. Perhaps this is why they (normally) tend to see the human form as a resource rather than prey. I'm not taking the p**s, if you raised a pup in the company of deer it is more likely to protect rather than attack them.

Ha Ha ,if you raised a pup with deer would it be a duppy? How does a toddler go out for a walk? Lol.
Whats to stop being getting a hyena and letting that loose?

bigfella777 wrote:

Stillness wrote:

Willy47 wrote:
Sorry Stillness i thought you had a vaild point, my response about getting out more was more aimed at GeorgeM.

I am a dog lover myself and much agree that they should be controlled and if they can't be and are a danger to the public (mainly small children)then worst case scenario they need to be put down.

As the point has already been made im sure that if that deer were a toddler out for a walk with their family then the dogs and their owners would feel very different about the situation. They were just lucky that THIS TIME it was only a deer.

Dogs tend to live with humans more often than they do with deer. Perhaps this is why they (normally) tend to see the human form as a resource rather than prey. I'm not taking the p**s, if you raised a pup in the company of deer it is more likely to protect rather than attack them.

Ha Ha ,if you raised a pup with deer would it be a duppy? How does a toddler go out for a walk? Lol.
Whats to stop being getting a hyena and letting that loose?

?

dog owners are ar5eholes....everyon
e knows this....

business-guru wrote:
dog owners are ar5eholes....everyon

e knows this....

Well you would know. After all your talking through one. No, I don't mean through a dog owner.

bigfella777 wrote:
Deer are pests,they cause damage to crops and gardens,they cause traffic accidents,large numbers are a threat to the environment. Only in this nimby country would someone care about a deer on a day when a 93 year old pensioner died in hospital after being beaten in her own home as she slept.

You dumba$$

So did the deer do the old lady...probably not!

What a stupid dumb comment....you a$$hole.

Deers have a right to live & as for dog owners ......KEEP YOUR DOG ON A LEASH YOU IDIOTS :d

Stillness wrote:

Urbane Forager wrote: As normal this forum has attracted the usual set of impassioned and polarised view-points and stupid arguments that make no sense at all. Deer are a lovely sight to some people and a pest to something g of a minority, farmers perhaps, but deer are allowed onto the nature reserve as are the sheep. Dog walkers are another group of people who feel threatened by legislation due to an irresponsible and downright dangerous few imbeciles. I know all about this feeling – I am a cyclist. Dogs should not be allowed to run free if they are trained to or even likely to attack or kill animals, wild or otherwise. This is obvious to normal minded people. Dogs of this nature may well not distinguish between deer, sheep, other dogs or children. I was attacked once by a large dog, it was a cross between a Rhodesian ridgeback and an Alsatian. I did nothing to provoke the attack and the owned could not prevent it despite his best efforts. I can tell you that it was an appalling experience, I am a big strong man and was able to fight back but not without nasty injuries. I reported the incident to the police because I was worried about children or the elderly, who would have likely been killed if it had happened to them. The owner, who is responsible, now muzzles the dog and keeps it on a lead in public, rightly so. Anyone who thinks it is OK for their dogs to ravage and attack animals, at will or on order, in a public space should be prosecuted and not allowed to keep animals. In fact they should probably be caged themselves. I take my children to St Catherine’s hill myself and it is a beautiful spot; thinking of a pack of attack dogs being let loose in an area where people go for a nice walk makes me shudder. As for the poor pensioner, that was dreadful, and I think we all hope the perpetrators are caged soon too but it has nothing whatsoever to do with what happened on St Catherine’s hill.

Please define "attack dogs"? I would suggest that any dog could be trained to be an attack dog. These are most probably not trained to attack anything. I can't recall the last time I saw an Afghan Hound being used by any police force, private security company or any branch of the military. Now stop being a plumb. As an urban forager I would expect you to have at least one Lurcher to help you catch your rabbits for diner. Nasty attack dogs no doubt.

Do grow up and try to read my post/the article before making such a knee JERK statement.

Attack dogs are dogs that attack a chosen target or I guess anything, in this case it was a deer but as I stated it could have been someone/thing else.

Dogs can be trained to be obedient and also to be aggressive - it's normally the owner who is considered responsible for their behaviour and training.

In this case they were either let loose on the deer deliberately, which is illegal or they were out of control and the irresponsible owner failed to restrain them, equally bad in a public area. In any case, the fact is that they did attack and kill the deer, hence “attack dogs”.

I’m no dog expert (and I don’t own one either) but Afghan hounds look to be built a bit like Lurchers or Greyhounds, ie for hunting/speed. The sort of dog/owner that might be involved in the practise of hare (or deer) coursing, which you seem to know something about…

Incidentally, I normally get my dinner out of the fridge and buy food from the shops. Again, if you bothered to read things, you might find out. I do pick fruit and nuts as a way of educating children to be involved in the land and nature and also engaging them with food. We do it for fun and it does save money too.

One final thing old bean – there is an “e” on the end of urban if you are referring to me or my blog ;-)

http://theurbanefora
ger.blogspot.co.uk/p
/urbane-vs-urban.htm
l

Huffter wrote:

Urbane Forager wrote: As normal this forum has attracted the usual set of impassioned and polarised view-points and stupid arguments that make no sense at all. Deer are a lovely sight to some people and a pest to something g of a minority, farmers perhaps, but deer are allowed onto the nature reserve as are the sheep. Dog walkers are another group of people who feel threatened by legislation due to an irresponsible and downright dangerous few imbeciles. I know all about this feeling – I am a cyclist. Dogs should not be allowed to run free if they are trained to or even likely to attack or kill animals, wild or otherwise. This is obvious to normal minded people. Dogs of this nature may well not distinguish between deer, sheep, other dogs or children. I was attacked once by a large dog, it was a cross between a Rhodesian ridgeback and an Alsatian. I did nothing to provoke the attack and the owned could not prevent it despite his best efforts. I can tell you that it was an appalling experience, I am a big strong man and was able to fight back but not without nasty injuries. I reported the incident to the police because I was worried about children or the elderly, who would have likely been killed if it had happened to them. The owner, who is responsible, now muzzles the dog and keeps it on a lead in public, rightly so. Anyone who thinks it is OK for their dogs to ravage and attack animals, at will or on order, in a public space should be prosecuted and not allowed to keep animals. In fact they should probably be caged themselves. I take my children to St Catherine’s hill myself and it is a beautiful spot; thinking of a pack of attack dogs being let loose in an area where people go for a nice walk makes me shudder. As for the poor pensioner, that was dreadful, and I think we all hope the perpetrators are caged soon too but it has nothing whatsoever to do with what happened on St Catherine’s hill.

Perhaps those who complain about irresponsible dog owners would be happier if dogs were not kept as pets at all, but just allowed to roam in wild packs. Natural state of things restored... everyone happy...???

No.

That is clearly not what was stated at all, is it?

Can you not read?

Or are you just unable to express your feelings in a normal way?

You seem unable to construct a logical argument...

bigfella777 wrote:

Stillness wrote:

Willy47 wrote:
Sorry Stillness i thought you had a vaild point, my response about getting out more was more aimed at GeorgeM.

I am a dog lover myself and much agree that they should be controlled and if they can't be and are a danger to the public (mainly small children)then worst case scenario they need to be put down.

As the point has already been made im sure that if that deer were a toddler out for a walk with their family then the dogs and their owners would feel very different about the situation. They were just lucky that THIS TIME it was only a deer.

Dogs tend to live with humans more often than they do with deer. Perhaps this is why they (normally) tend to see the human form as a resource rather than prey. I'm not taking the p**s, if you raised a pup in the company of deer it is more likely to protect rather than attack them.

Ha Ha ,if you raised a pup with deer would it be a duppy? How does a toddler go out for a walk? Lol.
Whats to stop being getting a hyena and letting that loose?

Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?

Stillness wrote:

bigfella777 wrote:

Stillness wrote:

Willy47 wrote: Sorry Stillness i thought you had a vaild point, my response about getting out more was more aimed at GeorgeM. I am a dog lover myself and much agree that they should be controlled and if they can't be and are a danger to the public (mainly small children)then worst case scenario they need to be put down. As the point has already been made im sure that if that deer were a toddler out for a walk with their family then the dogs and their owners would feel very different about the situation. They were just lucky that THIS TIME it was only a deer.

Dogs tend to live with humans more often than they do with deer. Perhaps this is why they (normally) tend to see the human form as a resource rather than prey. I'm not taking the p**s, if you raised a pup in the company of deer it is more likely to protect rather than attack them.

Ha Ha ,if you raised a pup with deer would it be a duppy? How does a toddler go out for a walk? Lol. Whats to stop being getting a hyena and letting that loose?

?

Madness...

Georgem wrote:

bigfella777 wrote:

Stillness wrote:

Willy47 wrote:
Sorry Stillness i thought you had a vaild point, my response about getting out more was more aimed at GeorgeM.

I am a dog lover myself and much agree that they should be controlled and if they can't be and are a danger to the public (mainly small children)then worst case scenario they need to be put down.

As the point has already been made im sure that if that deer were a toddler out for a walk with their family then the dogs and their owners would feel very different about the situation. They were just lucky that THIS TIME it was only a deer.

Dogs tend to live with humans more often than they do with deer. Perhaps this is why they (normally) tend to see the human form as a resource rather than prey. I'm not taking the p**s, if you raised a pup in the company of deer it is more likely to protect rather than attack them.

Ha Ha ,if you raised a pup with deer would it be a duppy? How does a toddler go out for a walk? Lol.
Whats to stop being getting a hyena and letting that loose?

Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?

Some sense at last

Stillness wrote:

Georgem wrote:

bigfella777 wrote:

Stillness wrote:

Willy47 wrote: Sorry Stillness i thought you had a vaild point, my response about getting out more was more aimed at GeorgeM. I am a dog lover myself and much agree that they should be controlled and if they can't be and are a danger to the public (mainly small children)then worst case scenario they need to be put down. As the point has already been made im sure that if that deer were a toddler out for a walk with their family then the dogs and their owners would feel very different about the situation. They were just lucky that THIS TIME it was only a deer.

Dogs tend to live with humans more often than they do with deer. Perhaps this is why they (normally) tend to see the human form as a resource rather than prey. I'm not taking the p**s, if you raised a pup in the company of deer it is more likely to protect rather than attack them.

Ha Ha ,if you raised a pup with deer would it be a duppy? How does a toddler go out for a walk? Lol. Whats to stop being getting a hyena and letting that loose?

Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?

Some sense at last

Do you want some Elderflower with that?

Stillness wrote:

Georgem wrote:

bigfella777 wrote:

Stillness wrote:

Willy47 wrote:
Sorry Stillness i thought you had a vaild point, my response about getting out more was more aimed at GeorgeM.

I am a dog lover myself and much agree that they should be controlled and if they can't be and are a danger to the public (mainly small children)then worst case scenario they need to be put down.

As the point has already been made im sure that if that deer were a toddler out for a walk with their family then the dogs and their owners would feel very different about the situation. They were just lucky that THIS TIME it was only a deer.

Dogs tend to live with humans more often than they do with deer. Perhaps this is why they (normally) tend to see the human form as a resource rather than prey. I'm not taking the p**s, if you raised a pup in the company of deer it is more likely to protect rather than attack them.

Ha Ha ,if you raised a pup with deer would it be a duppy? How does a toddler go out for a walk? Lol.
Whats to stop being getting a hyena and letting that loose?

Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?

Some sense at last

You’ve got to be kidding me. I’ve been further even more decided to use even go need to do look more as anyone can. Can you really be far even as decided half as much to use go wish for that? My guess is that when one really been far even as decided once to use even go want, it is then that he has really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like. It’s just common sense.

Hound types should always be kept on leads, and muzzled. Gentle as they are, once they see something or catch a scent they are long gone and won't come back until they have killed whatever they're chasing. Instinct overrides nurture. Always.

There's a heck of a lot of discussion here as a result of this article.

Isn't hunting deer (and foxes) with dogs illegal? I'm sure there was a law passed, caused a lot of fuss for welly-wearers, all about hunting with dogs. My belief is that the law applies whether you do something accidentally or in ignorance or not.

So did the article just forget to mention that the owner could be prosecuted? Or is there a loophole?

Someone here said "Dogs should not be allowed to run free if they are trained to or even likely to attack or kill animals, wild or otherwise. This is obvious to normal minded people. Dogs of this nature may well not distinguish between deer, sheep, other dogs or children".

Not true : ) Anyone who has been at any country show in the last 50+ years will have seen hounds (otter, mink, fox etc) in the main ring, loose, and all the kids invited in to see them. The kids love it, the dogs love it. I'm not disputing that some dogs attack things they shouldn't, but you can't generalise. It's like saying all women are good cooks; some are plain awful.