Synopsis of the Dog Attack

On the 16th July 2006 I was badly mauled by a German Shepherd dog that I was exercising. The dog bowled me to the road and continued mauling me until my husband arrived on the scene and pulled the dog off. He was exercising the second dog owned by the same owners Dot and Graeme Pleasants (President of the Wanganui RSA and one of the 12 ambassadors to Wanganui City).I ended up in hospital for 3 days with 85 stitches.The medical care I received was excellent but it still took 7 weeks for the wounds to heal.A subsequent “hearing” held by the Wanganui District Council released the dog to the community with a robust agreement which if it had been enforced would have been adequate. Unfortunately the agreement was never enforced.( something I am determine to change)The main requirements of the agreement included the requirements of the dangerous dog act including some extra restrictions such as the dog was only ever to be handled by the owners and never to leave the property except under extenuating circumstances. The Wanganui District Council are satisfied with the dog being secured by a 1.2m fence- Ive dealt with pugs and foxies that would make light of a fence that height never mind a very dangerous dog.Both dogs were unregistered. The fine for not being registered was never charged ($300 per dog) The requirements of the existing agreement also listed a registration of 150%-mysteriously a normal fee was charged with a neutered rebate being given before the dog was even neutered.The owners were given a good owner rebate on the second dog -they weren’t entitled to it.

The interesting legal situation is that as the dog in question was unregistered and therefore did not have an owner it could have been easily euthanaised by the Council- a fact they never acquainted me with at the time.(I wonder why). I might add that I would still have waited for the owners decision and believed that they would do the right thing .How wrong can you be. After the hearing when I rightly made it very plain that I was disastisfied with the Councils inaction they then went and got a legal opinion which stated that I was the owner – something voluntarily disputed by the ombudsman who has yet to give a full legal opinion on the actions of the Wanganui District Council. The question of ownership has also been disputed by the Associate Minister for the Enviroment Nanaia Mahuta

The legal opinion proffered by Wellington firm Kensington Swan also included the very sound advice that the dangerous dog act and the agreement must be enforced and their opinion was actually based in good part on this premise. For reasons that now may be dawning on the reader the Wanganui District Council had chosen to ignore this advice. I wonder why?

Since then Nanaia Mahuta has become involved and as a result the WDC now have to check on the dog in question every week for the rest of its life. Now you have to ask yourself how much money has the WDC actually saved the ratepayer. If the dog attacks someone else other than the owner and there is fairly good chance of that as the owners refuse to recognise that the dog is dangerous not only will the owners then be liable for a fine of around $20,000 and/or 3 years in jail but the Wanganui District Council can expect to become embroiled in it all also. The other interesting aspect is that as the dog is registered in Dot Pleasants name and not her husbands ( he distanced himself rather promptly- I wonder why?) it will be her that will shoulder the charges- what some husbands will do to their wives.

Footnote: All postings and proof are still present on the site- albeit archived

Sharkaar -The Pitbull

Since the last post we have had a young crossbred pitbull come into be boarded which demonstrates clearly how problems so easily errupt with the breed. Sharkaar is about 8 months old and very very bouncy- not very disciplined . When walking him he is constantly on the go and focuses immediately on any sudden movement- this unfortunately is a constant trait we see in pitbulls-moreso than any other breed.
I have set out to teach him what I consider are safeguard manners i.e. sit when he has the lead put on, when hes asked to sit to remain in a sit until I give him the next command -always preceeded by praise. I’m also working on getting him to walk quietly beside me- not necessarily at heel. The reason being that in a boarding situation any dog is excited about a walk and as exercise is more restricted than when the dog is at home its a big ask to expect them not to want to have a good sniff and stretch.The larger dogs are always walked on a horse lead for exactly this reason.
Sharkaar also unfortunately exhibits the tendency to want to attack other dogs and stock- in a boarding situation he cant reach either- quite a difference when hes at home and loose. We will be recommending to his owners to take him to puppy school or obedience where he will meet other dogs and good behaviour can be encouraged and the meeting of other dogs is not something unusual. We will also be recommending to the owner to walk Sharkaar heaps around the small village where they live so he can get used to seeing stock and its not something unusual.
Sharkaar is a rescue dog and as a consequence he and his new owners are starting on the backfoot- if they had had him from a very young puppy the very necessary socialisation would have been taken care of- more so than with any other breed but really this applies to any of the guard breeds- socialisation at the very earliest possible is so essential.
Anyone who gets a new puppy should once it has been vaccinated start the socialisation process and continue with it until maturity. What I think is happening with a lot of dogs in the present day society- the dog is locked up a lot more- not taken for that walk morning and night and as a result that essential leader of the pack-owner in charge- whatever you want to call it is lost. Sadly if our recommendations aren’t followed this will more than likely become yet another example of a pitbull gone wrong.

Ban Pitbulls?

Will banning various breeds get round the dog attack problems. Of course not. Anyone with an ounce of commonsense will tell you that the owner has considerable input into how safe their dog is to handle. The three most dangerous dogs I have handled as I have stated before are a golden cocker spaniel, a beagle and of course the German Shepherd that so badly mauled me.
Both the Golden Cocker and the Beagle exhibited dangerous behaviours even whilst penned. We could only get into the Golden Cockers pen with some difficulty and a clear demonstration of how difficult the Beagle was- we were running an Access course and all the students selected for the course had had previous dog experience but when the Beagle came onto the property I marshalled the students all down to the pen that held the Beagle and told them very clearly not on any account to enter the pen but when whatever task they were doing required entering the Beagle pen they were to come and get either my husband or I and we would deal with the Beagle. One of the students who owned an English Bull Mastiff obviously decided that we didn’t know what we were talking about and proceeded to ignore our request and entered the Beagle pen and was promptly bitten. Needless to say I had Oosh etc down on my head until it was pointed out that all the necessary safety requirements had actually been met.
Over the years we have handled a number of pitbulls – none of which we have had to ban and when the dangerous dog amendment came out the only change to operations that we made was to ask to meet any dog on the dangerous dog list before we agreed to board it. To date we have yet to refuse admission to any – and yet we continually deal with extremely spoilt downright agressive small breeds i.e. chihuahua , etc that if they were the size of a pitbull would be extremely dangerous. Our answer to this problem is to point out to the owner that they need to imagine the afore said spoilt dog as being the size of a pitbull or rottie and then think hard about if they still see the behaviour as acceptable.Some owners are obviously afronted by this approach but we are quite unrepentant and I might add have always had this approach -long before I was attacked.
Many of my vet friends have stated that owners in general seem uncaring if a vet is bitten. I would be appalled if any of my dogs even growled at a vet and I would see it as a lack of socialisation and training on my part if they did.

Curiouser and Curiouser

Well what else would you call it when media reports on the Wanganui District Council website suddenly disappear.
Prior to my opening this website a good friend of mine e-mailed me with the advice to plug in the name of the owner of the dog and Wanganui on Google and followed that with the comment “Welcome to the new boys club”. To my amazement some 16 entries came up linking Michael Laws and Graeme Pleasants- today there are only the 2 entries . Whats even more amazing is the claim made by Michael Laws that he told me on numerous occasions how he wanted to see the dog put down. Absolute rubbish- he initially said that he wanted the dog put down at the meeting I had with him- then changed his mind obviously once he found out who the dog belonged to. When Closeup approached him to appear giving him the chance to give the Wanganui District Council viewpoint he refused stating that I must have done something to the dog and that I should move on.
Once he encountered the public reaction he had no choice but to move and try and create spin that put him in a better light.