A lot of native animals come by the house and ignored my cattle dog, admittedly they are very skittish about any sudden movements - The reason the wild animals drop in is because we have green grass - which I differ from "feeding" them. This is often the case in many caravan parks - the lush pasture is the attraction not some kid throwing bread at them.
Unfortunately we no longer travel with a dog, mind you I don't believe I could survive losing another companion - so I am always the first to volunteer to mind a dog, while it's people go shopping, sightseeing or even on holidays.
Plain Truth said
10:06 AM Aug 21, 2017
We have nothing against dogs,we had three at one stage.Now they have gone and we camp in lots of National Parks we haven't replaced them.
As for being accused of taking photos of wildlife in Parks where people feed them to keep them around,that is a false assumption.
We have camped in a Nat.Park where I had to escort the wife to the drop toilet because the kangaroos wouldn't move out the way. But then" they know more than me"
Once again, its not the dogs that are the problem, it's the owners. About 99.99999% are irresponsible!
I'd like to see you prove that inflated figure, so either put up of shut up!
The proof is in the pudding, any time we take our Alice for a walk, we have to dodge half a dozen dogs running freely off leash. When these dogs rush over to greet or eat, these morons yell out 'it's Ok, he's friendly'. That may well be the case, but how do they know Alice is'. Walk down the pathway in your neighbourhood and see how many droppings are left behind. Owners are the problem, dogs are incapable of handling a poop and a plastic bag.
Our Alice is a rescue dog, 5 years old when we adopted her, she is timid in the extreme and is terrified of other people and dogs. Having a dog rush up to her when we are trying to accustom her to new sights, smells, events is not helped by these irresponsible owners. I have never managed to walk Alice around the block to the local park without encountering another dog off lead. Irresponsible dog owners, probably like yourself, need to understand it is their responsibility to ensure their dogs do not annoy or interfere with others going about their business.
I trained RAAF Police Dogs for almost all my working life, I chose this career because i love dogs. Without Alice in tow I will talk to and pet any dog I come across, of course with the owner's permission, it is in my nature. But when I am walking my Alice she is my responsibility and I expect others to take responsibility for their dogs, letting them run around off leash is not responsible.
You may not agree, but most owners do not make any effort to control their dogs; again, dogs are not the problem, owners are!
BruDi said
01:14 PM Aug 21, 2017
I think it would have been more accurate to say 'many dog owners', not 99.9....%. Much more than your <1% are responsible dog owners. You are also making assumptions about other people and their behaviour and ascribing the worst to them. I would quite happily take our dog into a National Park if it were allowed. However she would be on a lead as National Parks have a habit of dropping 1080 baits some laced with strychnine.
Whenever we are away we seek out areas where our dog can have a run, not worry other dogs or have them worry her, nor worry other people. Of course cleaning up after her is vital. Sure lots of people don't do the right thing and so we tend to think most people are the problem.
We take our dog to an off-leash area and even there she can be worried by bigger dogs. We prefer to be circumspect in her dealings with other dogs; for her safety and our peace of mind.
Di
toglhot said
05:27 PM Aug 21, 2017
No, I'll stand by what I said, 99.999% of dog owners are totally irresponsible. My wife has been attacked three times, the last time we were riding our bikes along the beach and a wolfhound being walked off leash along the beach attacked us both, the wife wore the scars, when it turned to me, it wore the scars andthe owner chastised me???
The owner continued walking along the beach without even checking to see if my wife was ok, when I confronted him he was totally disinterested. His dog was not registered I later found out he had a history. Another time two BCs attacked us, again the owner didn't even bother coming to the wife's aid or ask how she was, rather he abused me for daring to chase his dogs away. Third time a dog attacked my wife's arm through the open car window. Agree or not, this is typical owner behaviour.
Yes it is permissible to ride a bicycle along the beach and no it is not permissible for a dog to attack anyone through a car window.
It is my experience that incidents like this are not rare, they happen on a daily basis. Again, not the dog's fault, the owners are to blame. 99.999% 0f owners are irresponsible.
The sheer number of dog droppings around attests to the fact that the vast majority of owners do not pick up after their dogs.
Dogs are banned from NPs, many CPs and many other places because of irresponsible owners. Nothing to do with wildlife being afraid, Dingos/wild dogs are plentiful in our NPs, one only has to open their eyes. If wildlife were so afraid of dogs and their smell, the NPs would be devoid of wildlife.
We can't take a walk through the park without a dog bounding up to us. Thanks to 99.9999% of dog owners my wife is now terrified of dogs.
-- Edited by toglhot on Monday 21st of August 2017 05:28:51 PM
So according to your calculations toglhot, if you and 100 people are in a park, you are the only responsible dog owner there. Well mate you are either a God or a total wanker. I'll go with the latter.
-- Edited by madaboutled on Monday 21st of August 2017 09:03:32 PM
BruDi said
08:47 PM Aug 21, 2017
Give us the actual proven figures for 99.9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% rather than you assumptions!
By the way, I have exaggerated your figures.
Di
toglhot said
10:26 AM Aug 22, 2017
BruDi, how about you give me some figures disproving mine???
Madaboutled, I think I'll call you ten dicks, you can't get that silly playing with one!
Greystone said
12:01 PM Aug 22, 2017
Hey people, I am a dog owner myself and understand both sides, but this thread is getting out of control! How about some perspective? Please have a look at what I posted earlier under "perspective".
TheHeaths said
03:49 PM Aug 22, 2017
It is not good that you have had some incidents with dogs that have caused problems for you and your wife, Tony.
We have not. So, on that basis I conclude that 100% of dog owners are responsible.
That figure has as much basis in fact and sense as your statistics Tony.
toglhot said
05:26 PM Aug 22, 2017
Exactly TheHeaths, I concur with your sentiments: My opinion, your opinion, we all have a right to them and base them on our experience. No one is so special that their opinion trumps everyone elses!
madaboutled said
07:30 PM Aug 23, 2017
toglhot wrote:
BruDi, how about you give me some figures disproving mine???
Madaboutled, I think I'll call you ten dicks, you can't get that silly playing with one!
What a joke you offend every resonsisible dog owner by effectively claiming you are the only responsibe dog owner and you pull unrealistic figures from thin air with nothing other than your own personal opinion that then expect others to disprove your fabricated figures. The only Dick in this discussion is YOU.
Blues Man said
08:02 AM Aug 24, 2017
Boy ,this topic is getting so hot.
I Suggest we all get some Perspective.
blues man.
toglhot said
10:02 AM Aug 24, 2017
Madaboutled, I'd like to see you disprove that inflated figure, so either put up of shut up!
dazz49 said
12:45 PM Aug 24, 2017
You could say
'This has turned into a bit of a dog fight"
aussie_paul said
04:54 PM Aug 24, 2017
dazz49 wrote:
You could say 'This has turned into a bit of a dog fight"
LOL.
Aussie Paul.
dazz49 said
08:14 PM Aug 24, 2017
aussie_paul wrote:
dazz49 wrote:
You could say 'This has turned into a bit of a dog fight"
LOL.
Aussie Paul.
Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
toglhot said
11:21 AM Aug 25, 2017
Most forum threads turn into dog fights. by and large people are incapable of accepting that others may have a different opinion. I like it, it's funny to see the reactions.
dazz49 said
12:17 PM Aug 25, 2017
More Bark than Bite
matildatraveller said
06:42 PM Aug 25, 2017
Hellooooo.... thought all us dog lovers may get a BIG laugh out of this photo!!!! Gwynnie
Hellooooo.... thought all us dog lovers may get a BIG laugh out of this photo!!!! Gwynnie
Love it!
Santa said
09:08 AM Aug 29, 2017
Don't post on GN much any more, the bigots seem to have taken over, this thread is a prime example.
Members of a forum should be able to express an opinion without fear of ridicule or personal attack.
Stuart-Jan said
11:14 AM Aug 29, 2017
Everyone has a right to form their own opinion and if they wish post it on the forum fully expecting that they will find others that disagree with their thinking. There is nothing wrong with that. However people that stoop to personally attacking others because they do not agree with that person should be dealt with by the forum admin. It is not acceptable to be insulted by some loudmouth that thinks that his opinions are the only important ones. toqlhot. Your claim that 99.9% of dog owners are irresponsible is , quiet honestly. Totally ridiculous.If you wish to make exaggerated claims like that you will always find plenty that disagree with you.I am not a dog owner actually. I will be travelling with 2 cats. I would be interested to know what you think of that idea. BTW I also think that anyone that resorts to personal insults has immediately lost any credibility & lost the argument.
OH And I will not be taking said cats into any National Parks.
toglhot said
06:34 PM Aug 29, 2017
Stuart-Jan, Ridiculous / ridicule, can you see a link there. No matter, I take your point and you have just lost all your credibility! I make no distinction between cats, dogs, horses, ****atoos, I like all animals, I believe they have as much right to life as we do (well, most of us anyway), in assuming I would have something to say about travelling with cats; again, you have lost all credibility. I wonder how many times you can do that???
" It is not acceptable to be insulted by some loudmouth that thinks that his opinions are the only important ones."
This rings a bell for me, how about you? Seems to me I've read it somewhere before!
Oh and this little gem:
"people that stoop to personally attacking others because they do not agree with that person should be dealt with by the forum admin."
Hypocrite definition: a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings.
toglhot said
06:36 PM Aug 29, 2017
That's got to be a joke, the word ****atoo has been "moderated" to comply with some sort of ridiculous political correctness!
Santa said
07:02 PM Aug 29, 2017
Stuart-Jan wrote:
Everyone has a right to form their own opinion and if they wish post it on the forum fully expecting that they will find others that disagree with their thinking. There is nothing wrong with that. However people that stoop to personally attacking others because they do not agree with that person should be dealt with by the forum admin. It is not acceptable to be insulted by some loudmouth that thinks that his opinions are the only important ones. toqlhot. Your claim that 99.9% of dog owners are irresponsible is , quiet honestly. Totally ridiculous.If you wish to make exaggerated claims like that you will always find plenty that disagree with you.I am not a dog owner actually. I will be travelling with 2 cats. I would be interested to know what you think of that idea. BTW I also think that anyone that resorts to personal insults has immediately lost any credibility & lost the argument. OH And I will not be taking said cats into any National Parks.
Your right Stuart-Jan, as I said in my previous post, the people that resort to this type of disparaging post are bigots.
Just in case the word needs clarification for some,
bigot
the fact of having and expressingstrong, unreasonablebeliefs and disliking other people who have different beliefs or a different way of life:
Stuart-Jan said
09:06 PM Aug 29, 2017
toglhot wrote:
Stuart-Jan, Ridiculous / ridicule, can you see a link there. No matter, I take your point and you have just lost all your credibility! I make no distinction between cats, dogs, horses, ****atoos, I like all animals, I believe they have as much right to life as we do (well, most of us anyway), in assuming I would have something to say about travelling with cats; again, you have lost all credibility. I wonder how many times you can do that???
" It is not acceptable to be insulted by some loudmouth that thinks that his opinions are the only important ones."
This rings a bell for me, how about you? Seems to me I've read it somewhere before!
Oh and this little gem:
"people that stoop to personally attacking others because they do not agree with that person should be dealt with by the forum admin."
Hypocrite definition: a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings.
?
Waffleightis said
02:15 PM Aug 30, 2017
Dogs leave a scent that scare away native animals???? WHAT...we have travelled to many bush locations and camped for weeks on end. This is with 2 Labradors camping with us surrounded by native wildlife that also ventures into national parks...and we have native animals still coming close to camp and not scared away...this is in spots where the wildlife is wild and not tamed...it is the weekender campers that pull into campgrounds make a racket and have a boos up that sacre the wildlife away... and if anyone thinks that us humans don't leave a scent behind just by walking through or watering behind a tree... then you must think your poo don't stink!!!!! We are no different to any other animal. What national parks and wildlife tells you is crap, get out of your houses, vans and off your computers and observe nature!!! In fact national parks and wildlife clear land and put in toilet blocks etc to create campgrounds...why aren't we complaining about this and the national parks and wildlife go off about dogs not being permitted in national parks. In fact there are national parks where there are kilometres of walking trails that allow dogs to be taken in for walks...one is goonoowigal in New South Wales and another is in Victoria and there has been no impact on wildlife in these places..there is wildlife everywhere. There are some that don't allow dogs , but allow horses...why?have you smelt how far horse poo travels through the air...allot further than the smell of dog poo. We are on the road permanently and there is a very large population of travellers with dogs, those who don't see the amount with dogs most likely only frequent areas where dogs aren't permitted.
Waffleightis said
02:48 PM Aug 30, 2017
In fact...the rules created by national parks would have been from the advice of people who have most likely never ever stepped foot into Bushy areas in their life or camped in a true bush setting, they sit within a thier air conditioned office fenced in by a desk full of paper work. Correct me if I'm wrong!!! But this is even true of council officials that lay down laws in their own area...for example a small town in far North Queensland where we have lived for quite a while there was a road that lead not only to another town for many local farmers that had been in a very bad state of disprepair, almost impassable. The council officials who would not leave the comfort of their offices to drive out to check the state of the road that they had recieved complaints about and would only allocate funding for the roads that didn't need fixing...one cheeky bus driver who happened to be hired to drive the council officials to an event decided on the way back to the office to take the officials down this very gruelling stretch of road and the funding was allocated so darn fast, the road was fixed quick smart.. the road in question was dismissed by the council as they we I'll-informed due to their belief in traffic surveys and there not being enough traffic on the road for it to be so bad...... so my point is ...are national parks also Ill-informed. Our knowledge and our experience tells us they are il-informed. Where did this info come from about dogs...was it a recent study or one from 50 years ago, was it a weekend survey or a survey taken over several weeks from someone camping for the full few weeks in a bush setting with dogs and without?????
Plain Truth said
05:01 PM Aug 30, 2017
Waffleightis wrote:
Dogs leave a scent that scare away native animals???? WHAT...we have travelled to many bush locations and camped for weeks on end. This is with 2 Labradors camping with us surrounded by native wildlife that also ventures into national parks...and we have native animals still coming close to camp and not scared away...this is in spots where the wildlife is wild and not tamed...it is the weekender campers that pull into campgrounds make a racket and have a boos up that sacre the wildlife away... and if anyone thinks that us humans don't leave a scent behind just by walking through or watering behind a tree... then you must think your poo don't stink!!!!! We are no different to any other animal. What national parks and wildlife tells you is crap, get out of your houses, vans and off your computers and observe nature!!! In fact national parks and wildlife clear land and put in toilet blocks etc to create campgrounds...why aren't we complaining about this and the national parks and wildlife go off about dogs not being permitted in national parks. In fact there are national parks where there are kilometres of walking trails that allow dogs to be taken in for walks...one is goonoowigal in New South Wales and another is in Victoria and there has been no impact on wildlife in these places..there is wildlife everywhere. There are some that don't allow dogs , but allow horses...why?have you smelt how far horse poo travels through the air...allot further than the smell of dog poo. We are on the road permanently and there is a very large population of travellers with dogs, those who don't see the amount with dogs most likely only frequent areas where dogs aren't permitted.
Please get your facts right,Goonoowigal is a State Park not a National Parkhttp://www.nationalparks.nsw.gov.au/visit-a-park/parks/goonoowigal-state-conservation-area.
And you please name the National Park in Victoria that allows dogs.We have nothing against dogs,but people who want them in National Parks put up a lot of Furhpys and waffle on.
-- Edited by Plain Truth on Wednesday 30th of August 2017 05:01:47 PM
Unfortunately we no longer travel with a dog, mind you I don't believe I could survive losing another companion - so I am always the first to volunteer to mind a dog, while it's people go shopping, sightseeing or even on holidays.
We have nothing against dogs,we had three at one stage.Now they have gone and we camp in lots of National Parks we haven't replaced them.
As for being accused of taking photos of wildlife in Parks where people feed them to keep them around,that is a false assumption.
We have camped in a Nat.Park where I had to escort the wife to the drop toilet because the kangaroos wouldn't move out the way.
But then" they know more than me"
The proof is in the pudding, any time we take our Alice for a walk, we have to dodge half a dozen dogs running freely off leash. When these dogs rush over to greet or eat, these morons yell out 'it's Ok, he's friendly'. That may well be the case, but how do they know Alice is'. Walk down the pathway in your neighbourhood and see how many droppings are left behind. Owners are the problem, dogs are incapable of handling a poop and a plastic bag.
Our Alice is a rescue dog, 5 years old when we adopted her, she is timid in the extreme and is terrified of other people and dogs. Having a dog rush up to her when we are trying to accustom her to new sights, smells, events is not helped by these irresponsible owners. I have never managed to walk Alice around the block to the local park without encountering another dog off lead. Irresponsible dog owners, probably like yourself, need to understand it is their responsibility to ensure their dogs do not annoy or interfere with others going about their business.
I trained RAAF Police Dogs for almost all my working life, I chose this career because i love dogs. Without Alice in tow I will talk to and pet any dog I come across, of course with the owner's permission, it is in my nature. But when I am walking my Alice she is my responsibility and I expect others to take responsibility for their dogs, letting them run around off leash is not responsible.
You may not agree, but most owners do not make any effort to control their dogs; again, dogs are not the problem, owners are!
I think it would have been more accurate to say 'many dog owners', not 99.9....%. Much more than your <1% are responsible dog owners. You are also making assumptions about other people and their behaviour and ascribing the worst to them. I would quite happily take our dog into a National Park if it were allowed. However she would be on a lead as National Parks have a habit of dropping 1080 baits some laced with strychnine.
Whenever we are away we seek out areas where our dog can have a run, not worry other dogs or have them worry her, nor worry other people. Of course cleaning up after her is vital. Sure lots of people don't do the right thing and so we tend to think most people are the problem.
We take our dog to an off-leash area and even there she can be worried by bigger dogs. We prefer to be circumspect in her dealings with other dogs; for her safety and our peace of mind.
Di
No, I'll stand by what I said, 99.999% of dog owners are totally irresponsible. My wife has been attacked three times, the last time we were riding our bikes along the beach and a wolfhound being walked off leash along the beach attacked us both, the wife wore the scars, when it turned to me, it wore the scars andthe owner chastised me???
The owner continued walking along the beach without even checking to see if my wife was ok, when I confronted him he was totally disinterested. His dog was not registered I later found out he had a history. Another time two BCs attacked us, again the owner didn't even bother coming to the wife's aid or ask how she was, rather he abused me for daring to chase his dogs away. Third time a dog attacked my wife's arm through the open car window. Agree or not, this is typical owner behaviour.
Yes it is permissible to ride a bicycle along the beach and no it is not permissible for a dog to attack anyone through a car window.
It is my experience that incidents like this are not rare, they happen on a daily basis. Again, not the dog's fault, the owners are to blame. 99.999% 0f owners are irresponsible.
The sheer number of dog droppings around attests to the fact that the vast majority of owners do not pick up after their dogs.
Dogs are banned from NPs, many CPs and many other places because of irresponsible owners. Nothing to do with wildlife being afraid, Dingos/wild dogs are plentiful in our NPs, one only has to open their eyes. If wildlife were so afraid of dogs and their smell, the NPs would be devoid of wildlife.
We can't take a walk through the park without a dog bounding up to us. Thanks to 99.9999% of dog owners my wife is now terrified of dogs.
-- Edited by toglhot on Monday 21st of August 2017 05:28:51 PM
So according to your calculations toglhot, if you and 100 people are in a park, you are the only responsible dog owner there. Well mate you are either a God or a total wanker. I'll go with the latter.
-- Edited by madaboutled on Monday 21st of August 2017 09:03:32 PM
By the way, I have exaggerated your figures.
Di
Madaboutled, I think I'll call you ten dicks, you can't get that silly playing with one!
We have not. So, on that basis I conclude that 100% of dog owners are responsible.
That figure has as much basis in fact and sense as your statistics Tony.
What a joke you offend every resonsisible dog owner by effectively claiming you are the only responsibe dog owner and you pull unrealistic figures from thin air with nothing other than your own personal opinion that then expect others to disprove your fabricated figures. The only Dick in this discussion is YOU.
Boy ,this topic is getting so hot.
I Suggest we all get some Perspective.
blues man.
LOL.
Aussie Paul.
Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
Hellooooo.... thought all us dog lovers may get a BIG laugh out of this photo!!!! Gwynnie
Love it!
Don't post on GN much any more, the bigots seem to have taken over, this thread is a prime example.
Members of a forum should be able to express an opinion without fear of ridicule or personal attack.
OH And I will not be taking said cats into any National Parks.
" It is not acceptable to be insulted by some loudmouth that thinks that his opinions are the only important ones."
This rings a bell for me, how about you? Seems to me I've read it somewhere before!
Oh and this little gem:
"people that stoop to personally attacking others because they do not agree with that person should be dealt with by the forum admin."
Hypocrite definition: a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings.
Your right Stuart-Jan, as I said in my previous post, the people that resort to this type of disparaging post are bigots.
Just in case the word needs clarification for some,
bigot
the fact of having and expressing strong, unreasonable beliefs and disliking other people who have different beliefs or a different way of life:
?
Please get your facts right,Goonoowigal is a State Park not a National Parkhttp://www.nationalparks.nsw.gov.au/visit-a-park/parks/goonoowigal-state-conservation-area.
And you please name the National Park in Victoria that allows dogs.We have nothing against dogs,but people who want them in National Parks put up a lot of Furhpys and waffle on.
-- Edited by Plain Truth on Wednesday 30th of August 2017 05:01:47 PM