Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to copypaste pp because they get it and a lot of y'all need to.

"There's always a warning. People just tend to either ignore it or misread it. In this instance, the person in question should definitely have had the dogs separated and should have paid more attention. People who foster dogs should probably be required to take a class, but typically they aren't and rescue groups are mostly volunteers so here we are."

People ought to have a certification tests and an actual license to own animals the same way you need a license to drive a car. All dogs can bite, and the person on-duty is responsible for the animal(s) in their care.

"There is no such thing as attacking without provocation/ out of the blue. Sounds like there are many people on here who do not understand dog behaviour and should not be owners if you believe stuff like this. Unless your dog is cujo, there are always signs. If you ignore them and an animal gets hurt, that’s your fault as the supervising human."

Seriously. If you don't understand dogs, you'll think it's "out of the blue" when, to a more experienced/intelligent owner/handler, there are all kinds of signs. Even Cujo had signs, and a dog like that is a known issue; they don't "just snap" the way some of your idiots would allege.

If you're not willing to learn how dogs work, at least enough to handle them safely, you shouldn't have or handle dogs.

Okay, so I was the babysitter in this case who was attacked by the family's dog. I was 17 years old when I was attacked. What warning signs and obligations did I, as the person in the house have and ability to correct the dog that bit me. For what it's worth I did prevent the young children in the house from being bitten, my putting myself physically between them.

So this whole "there are always signs". If your dog is dangerous enough that someone has to be a dog mind reader to be safe around your dog, you are a bad dog owner who handed someone a hand grenade.

It's on the owners.

Agree with this. You shouldn't need a PhD in dog body language analysis to be around a dog.

Our doodle is fantastic - the kids roughhouse with her, I've accidentally stepped on her tail, I can take literally anything from her mouth, there's zero aggression. Never even a growl. That should be the standard for dogs.

You can have all of that and more and that's great. It doesn't mean your dog will never have a negative interaction with another dog. Putting two strange dogs together in one home without proper introductions and vetting is newbie BS and asking for trouble. The sitter was delusional to think this was a good idea. Sure, it could be fine. But a dog could meet your described standard and still get into it with another dog even if they never would with a human.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to copypaste pp because they get it and a lot of y'all need to.

"There's always a warning. People just tend to either ignore it or misread it. In this instance, the person in question should definitely have had the dogs separated and should have paid more attention. People who foster dogs should probably be required to take a class, but typically they aren't and rescue groups are mostly volunteers so here we are."

People ought to have a certification tests and an actual license to own animals the same way you need a license to drive a car. All dogs can bite, and the person on-duty is responsible for the animal(s) in their care.

"There is no such thing as attacking without provocation/ out of the blue. Sounds like there are many people on here who do not understand dog behaviour and should not be owners if you believe stuff like this. Unless your dog is cujo, there are always signs. If you ignore them and an animal gets hurt, that’s your fault as the supervising human."

Seriously. If you don't understand dogs, you'll think it's "out of the blue" when, to a more experienced/intelligent owner/handler, there are all kinds of signs. Even Cujo had signs, and a dog like that is a known issue; they don't "just snap" the way some of your idiots would allege.

If you're not willing to learn how dogs work, at least enough to handle them safely, you shouldn't have or handle dogs.

Okay, so I was the babysitter in this case who was attacked by the family's dog. I was 17 years old when I was attacked. What warning signs and obligations did I, as the person in the house have and ability to correct the dog that bit me. For what it's worth I did prevent the young children in the house from being bitten, my putting myself physically between them.

So this whole "there are always signs". If your dog is dangerous enough that someone has to be a dog mind reader to be safe around your dog, you are a bad dog owner who handed someone a hand grenade.

It's on the owners.

Agree with this. You shouldn't need a PhD in dog body language analysis to be around a dog.

Our doodle is fantastic - the kids roughhouse with her, I've accidentally stepped on her tail, I can take literally anything from her mouth, there's zero aggression. Never even a growl. That should be the standard for dogs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to copypaste pp because they get it and a lot of y'all need to.

"There's always a warning. People just tend to either ignore it or misread it. In this instance, the person in question should definitely have had the dogs separated and should have paid more attention. People who foster dogs should probably be required to take a class, but typically they aren't and rescue groups are mostly volunteers so here we are."

People ought to have a certification tests and an actual license to own animals the same way you need a license to drive a car. All dogs can bite, and the person on-duty is responsible for the animal(s) in their care.

"There is no such thing as attacking without provocation/ out of the blue. Sounds like there are many people on here who do not understand dog behaviour and should not be owners if you believe stuff like this. Unless your dog is cujo, there are always signs. If you ignore them and an animal gets hurt, that’s your fault as the supervising human."

Seriously. If you don't understand dogs, you'll think it's "out of the blue" when, to a more experienced/intelligent owner/handler, there are all kinds of signs. Even Cujo had signs, and a dog like that is a known issue; they don't "just snap" the way some of your idiots would allege.

If you're not willing to learn how dogs work, at least enough to handle them safely, you shouldn't have or handle dogs.

Okay, so I was the babysitter in this case who was attacked by the family's dog. I was 17 years old when I was attacked. What warning signs and obligations did I, as the person in the house have and ability to correct the dog that bit me. For what it's worth I did prevent the young children in the house from being bitten, my putting myself physically between them.

So this whole "there are always signs". If your dog is dangerous enough that someone has to be a dog mind reader to be safe around your dog, you are a bad dog owner who handed someone a hand grenade.

It's on the owners.

Agree with this. You shouldn't need a PhD in dog body language analysis to be around a dog.

Our doodle is fantastic - the kids roughhouse with her, I've accidentally stepped on her tail, I can take literally anything from her mouth, there's zero aggression. Never even a growl. That should be the standard for dogs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to copypaste pp because they get it and a lot of y'all need to.

"There's always a warning. People just tend to either ignore it or misread it. In this instance, the person in question should definitely have had the dogs separated and should have paid more attention. People who foster dogs should probably be required to take a class, but typically they aren't and rescue groups are mostly volunteers so here we are."

People ought to have a certification tests and an actual license to own animals the same way you need a license to drive a car. All dogs can bite, and the person on-duty is responsible for the animal(s) in their care.

"There is no such thing as attacking without provocation/ out of the blue. Sounds like there are many people on here who do not understand dog behaviour and should not be owners if you believe stuff like this. Unless your dog is cujo, there are always signs. If you ignore them and an animal gets hurt, that’s your fault as the supervising human."

Seriously. If you don't understand dogs, you'll think it's "out of the blue" when, to a more experienced/intelligent owner/handler, there are all kinds of signs. Even Cujo had signs, and a dog like that is a known issue; they don't "just snap" the way some of your idiots would allege.

If you're not willing to learn how dogs work, at least enough to handle them safely, you shouldn't have or handle dogs.

Okay, so I was the babysitter in this case who was attacked by the family's dog. I was 17 years old when I was attacked. What warning signs and obligations did I, as the person in the house have and ability to correct the dog that bit me. For what it's worth I did prevent the young children in the house from being bitten, my putting myself physically between them.

So this whole "there are always signs". If your dog is dangerous enough that someone has to be a dog mind reader to be safe around your dog, you are a bad dog owner who handed someone a hand grenade.

It's on the owners.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The dog owner, IMO. Your pet does something, it's your responsibility.

Dog needs to be reported to animal control as well.

This.

Animal control is less concerned about dog on dog aggression than many of the posters here seem to believe. Unless the dog is loose and attacking pets in their own yards or that are being walked on leash or there are intentionally staged dogfights, this isn't really an animal control issue. Two dogs residing in the same home on a temporary basis and confined within the bounds of that home behaved like dogs and had a scuffle resulting in nonfatal injuries to at least one dog. No humans were injured. This is entirely predictable and on the human that should have been in charge. Dogs don't get yoinked and put down for this.

I grew up with lots of dogs and a dog biting another dog severely enough to have to visit an emergency vet is not "behaved like dogs". That is well outside the norm for dog behavior.

+1. You can have empathy for dogs without normalizing attacks.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to copypaste pp because they get it and a lot of y'all need to.

"There's always a warning. People just tend to either ignore it or misread it. In this instance, the person in question should definitely have had the dogs separated and should have paid more attention. People who foster dogs should probably be required to take a class, but typically they aren't and rescue groups are mostly volunteers so here we are."

People ought to have a certification tests and an actual license to own animals the same way you need a license to drive a car. All dogs can bite, and the person on-duty is responsible for the animal(s) in their care.

"There is no such thing as attacking without provocation/ out of the blue. Sounds like there are many people on here who do not understand dog behaviour and should not be owners if you believe stuff like this. Unless your dog is cujo, there are always signs. If you ignore them and an animal gets hurt, that’s your fault as the supervising human."

Seriously. If you don't understand dogs, you'll think it's "out of the blue" when, to a more experienced/intelligent owner/handler, there are all kinds of signs. Even Cujo had signs, and a dog like that is a known issue; they don't "just snap" the way some of your idiots would allege.

If you're not willing to learn how dogs work, at least enough to handle them safely, you shouldn't have or handle dogs.

Okay, so I was the babysitter in this case who was attacked by the family's dog. I was 17 years old when I was attacked. What warning signs and obligations did I, as the person in the house have and ability to correct the dog that bit me. For what it's worth I did prevent the young children in the house from being bitten, my putting myself physically between them.

So this whole "there are always signs". If your dog is dangerous enough that someone has to be a dog mind reader to be safe around your dog, you are a bad dog owner who handed someone a hand grenade.

It's on the owners.

So it wasn’t out of the blue - he was going after the kids, so it’s quite likely something they did set him off. Kids are not gentle with animals. You then put yourself in the way to protect them. It’s very disingenuous to say that the dog attacked you out of the blue, because that sounds like a straight up lie from your next post.

The kids were just eating dinner and the dog lunged at the kid who was just sitting in the chair. I had pet and greeted this dog and played fetch with him just fine. I got between the dog and the kid. No one had warned me the dog was food aggressive. So yes, for a caretaker the dog attacked out of the blue.

And for the dog sitter that absolutely can happen too. They can't anticipate a dog's specific aggressions without being warned. I've personally experienced a dog attacking without warning in the seconds before. The dog probably had displayed food aggression before to its owners, so the dog in OP's story had displayed reactivity to other dogs. But that's then the owner's warning to pass on.

Point is: yes, dog owners bear the responsibility for aggression.

The dog sitter should have insurance as a licensed business.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The dog owner, IMO. Your pet does something, it's your responsibility.

Dog needs to be reported to animal control as well.

This.

Animal control is less concerned about dog on dog aggression than many of the posters here seem to believe. Unless the dog is loose and attacking pets in their own yards or that are being walked on leash or there are intentionally staged dogfights, this isn't really an animal control issue. Two dogs residing in the same home on a temporary basis and confined within the bounds of that home behaved like dogs and had a scuffle resulting in nonfatal injuries to at least one dog. No humans were injured. This is entirely predictable and on the human that should have been in charge. Dogs don't get yoinked and put down for this.

I grew up with lots of dogs and a dog biting another dog severely enough to have to visit an emergency vet is not "behaved like dogs". That is well outside the norm for dog behavior.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to copypaste pp because they get it and a lot of y'all need to.

"There's always a warning. People just tend to either ignore it or misread it. In this instance, the person in question should definitely have had the dogs separated and should have paid more attention. People who foster dogs should probably be required to take a class, but typically they aren't and rescue groups are mostly volunteers so here we are."

People ought to have a certification tests and an actual license to own animals the same way you need a license to drive a car. All dogs can bite, and the person on-duty is responsible for the animal(s) in their care.

"There is no such thing as attacking without provocation/ out of the blue. Sounds like there are many people on here who do not understand dog behaviour and should not be owners if you believe stuff like this. Unless your dog is cujo, there are always signs. If you ignore them and an animal gets hurt, that’s your fault as the supervising human."

Seriously. If you don't understand dogs, you'll think it's "out of the blue" when, to a more experienced/intelligent owner/handler, there are all kinds of signs. Even Cujo had signs, and a dog like that is a known issue; they don't "just snap" the way some of your idiots would allege.

If you're not willing to learn how dogs work, at least enough to handle them safely, you shouldn't have or handle dogs.

Okay, so I was the babysitter in this case who was attacked by the family's dog. I was 17 years old when I was attacked. What warning signs and obligations did I, as the person in the house have and ability to correct the dog that bit me. For what it's worth I did prevent the young children in the house from being bitten, my putting myself physically between them.

So this whole "there are always signs". If your dog is dangerous enough that someone has to be a dog mind reader to be safe around your dog, you are a bad dog owner who handed someone a hand grenade.

It's on the owners.

So it wasn’t out of the blue - he was going after the kids, so it’s quite likely something they did set him off. Kids are not gentle with animals. You then put yourself in the way to protect them. It’s very disingenuous to say that the dog attacked you out of the blue, because that sounds like a straight up lie from your next post.

The kids were just eating dinner and the dog lunged at the kid who was just sitting in the chair. I had pet and greeted this dog and played fetch with him just fine. I got between the dog and the kid. No one had warned me the dog was food aggressive. So yes, for a caretaker the dog attacked out of the blue.

And for the dog sitter that absolutely can happen too. They can't anticipate a dog's specific aggressions without being warned. I've personally experienced a dog attacking without warning in the seconds before. The dog probably had displayed food aggression before to its owners, so the dog in OP's story had displayed reactivity to other dogs. But that's then the owner's warning to pass on.

Point is: yes, dog owners bear the responsibility for aggression.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the biter owner doesn't immediately offer to pay, sue in small claims or call animal control and have the dog put down for public safety. Or both.

Yeah, that's not a thing. You can't 'have the dog put down' . The only danger to public safety I see here is rampant ignorance.

Yep. For better or worse, you can have a dog who kills 40 other dogs, but unless they touch a human its not a threat to public safety. Animals are just considered to be property like a chair or a table, so the biter dog is the equivalent of a tenant who scratches your floors.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the biter owner doesn't immediately offer to pay, sue in small claims or call animal control and have the dog put down for public safety. Or both.

Yeah, that's not a thing. You can't 'have the dog put down' . The only danger to public safety I see here is rampant ignorance.

Anonymous wrote:If the biter owner doesn't immediately offer to pay, sue in small claims or call animal control and have the dog put down for public safety. Or both.

Anonymous wrote:Hi DCUM,
Question re financial responsibilities of the dog owners vs pet sitters
here is the deal - my friend fosters dogs regularly, and sometimes takes relative's dog in when they have to travel (free of charge). All was ok until it wasn't: relative's dog attacked foster dog out of the blue, foster had wounds were serious enough for emergency vet visit. Initially, the rescue covered all of the bills, but now is asking for reimbursement.
Who is responsible for that bill? Dog owner or pet sitter/dog foster?

Anonymous wrote:If the biter owner doesn't immediately offer to pay, sue in small claims or call animal control and have the dog put down for public safety. Or both.