Dogs attack riders, kill one horse

[brd7666]

March 12, 2010
Dogs attack riders, kill one horse
Bizarre Florida is loaded with darkly funny stories. This one isn’t, though it certainly is bizarre.

A pit bull and a boxer attacked two horses and riders in a residential area of Golden Gate Estates in Naples, naplesnews.com reports. A 15-year-old girl was thrown from one horse, but she and the rider of the other horse escaped. Then the dogs ran down and killed the riderless horse.

Deputies located the dogs, but took only one into custody (it was still loose when deputies arrived). Authorities are determining whether the dogs are dangerous.
Posted by John Chamless at 08:30:00 AM on March 12, 2010
in | Permalink

HERE IS THE LINK

http://blogs.tampabay.com/bizarre/2010/03/dogs-attack-riders-kill-one-horse.html

CHECK THIS OUT

.UPDATE: Dogs maul, kill horse; owner says she feels horrible about attack
By TRACY X. MIGUEL
Posted March 11, 2010 at 4:12 p.m. , updated March 12, 2010 at 1:25 p.m.

The owner of two dogs that are accused of mauling a horse to death said Friday she feels horrible.

"The tears aren't just for Charlie,” Billie Jo Herrera said about her American bull dog, which she plans to put down if it is determined to be dangerous. “I really feel bad for the girl,".

Herrera, who is disabled and uses a wheelchair, said she could not afford to pay the $300 per dog to keep the animals if they are determined to be "dangerous dogs" by Domestic Animal Services.

Her American bull dog was seized by animal services because it was loose when officials came to investigate the issue. The second dog involved in the incident, Princesa, a 2-year-old boxer that the family has had for eight months, is still in Herrera's home.

The 1 1/2-year-old American bull dog is a family dog raised among Herrera's seven children, who range in age from 2 to 15, she said.

"I know everyone in the world will consider Charlie a God-awful dog but he is not," said Herrera, 41. "You couldn't ask for a much better dog for my kids."

From earlier

Two dogs attacked and mauled a horse to death, knocking off the young rider in the process, according to a Golden Gate Estates woman and a Collier County Sheriff’s Office incident report.

What should have been a smooth horseback riding trip turned into a life-threatening ride for Kayla Thorn, 15.

Around 7 p.m. Tuesday, Penny Packard, 59, and Kayla rode their horses on 2nd Avenue Southeast in Golden Gate Estates when an American bulldog and a boxer started chasing after the horses, attacking and biting them. A struggle ensued between the animals. Kayla hung on as long as she could but was thrown from her horse, Dancer, as it tried to elude the dogs.

“I was just freaking out because I didn’t know what they were going to do to my horse or how it would end up and it ended up really badly,” said Kayla, who has been riding Dancer for three years.

“It was very scary having dogs diving toward your horses,” Packard said.

The dogs continued to chase the 25-year-old horse into a wooded area. Packard and Kayla rode home on the other horse.

“They just got really mean about it,” Kayla recalled.

Law enforcement officials and the horse’s owners later discovered Dancer mauled to death, apparently by the dogs. A huge amount of blood was left on the trail.

The blood area was as big as a dining room table, Packard said.

“I just turned around and covered my face,” she said.

After a long pause, Packard said she felt terror.

“I was shocked,” Packard said about finding Dancer killed. Dancer had lived on Packard’s property for six years.

“I’m upset and I don’t understand why this could happen to him. He did nothing wrong,” said Kayla, who has been riding horses since age 7. “He just was a very good horse.”

The dogs were located. The American bulldog was taken into custody because it was loose when deputies arrived, Domestic Animal Services Director Amanda Townsend said.

It wasn’t the first time the dogs went after the horses, Kayla said.

The case is under investigation by Domestic Animal Services. The agency will conduct a dangerous dog investigation of both dogs, Townsend said.

If Domestic Animal Services determines that the dogs are dangerous, owner Billie Jo Herrera has three options. She could surrender the dog or both dogs to be euthanized, she could appeal the decision to a three-person panel or she could choose to keep the “dangerous” dogs by paying a $300 annual registration fee per dog, keep the dogs properly enclosed with signs on every entry of the house, muzzle the dogs and provide a photograph to Domestic Animal Services.

According to reports, Herrera confirmed that the dogs had gotten out and that “they were horse aggressive.”

Herrera said she was willing to surrender her dog Charlie and would come in Friday to file paperwork and say goodbye, reports said. Pending the outcome of the investigation, she said she wanted to keep her other dog, whose name is Princesa, and agreed to keep it in “dangerous dog” home impound, reports said.

Herrera asked deputies for contact information for the horse’s owners so she could apologize and offer to help them replace the horse if that is what they wanted. Herrera also recognized that she is responsible for any vet bills, according to reports.

Kayla said they haven’t been contacted by Herrera.

Packard said she knew something was wrong when they returned home and didn’t find Dancer after the initial attack. They figured the horse would be able to run faster than the dogs and walk home on its own.

“Horses always go back home,” said Packard, who has owned horses her entire life. The incident occurred about two miles from Packard’s home.

Packard’s horse, whose name is Mariah, was attacked as well and has three “good bite cuts.”

“I will not ride off of my property again,” said Packard, who has lived at Second Avenue Northeast off of Everglades Boulevard for six years. “I’m scared to death.”

Packard disagrees with Domestic Animal Services that the dog owners have the right to keep their dogs.

“I’m very concerned because the dogs weren’t removed from the house,” Packard said. “I want the law to change.”

If there are children in the neighborhood, Packard said these dogs are dangerous and should be euthanized.

“These are people who haven’t controlled their dogs in the first place,” she said.

LINK

http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2010/mar/11/dogs-maul-kill-horse-teen-thrown-horse-during-atta/

 

[RJK890]

PitBull?

The owner said that it was an American Bulldog, and a Boxer that ran down and killed the horse. Not a PitBull, like the headline reads.

If the dogs were "dangerous" they would have turned on the 15yr. old girl when she was thrown from her horse.
They were "hunting" the horse, not the girl.

The dogs are obviously not being kept properly and are a threat to public safety because of the neglect of their owner(s.)

 

[WingedWolf]

I don't know. Dogs can occasionally get loose, and unless you live on a farm, how many people have access to livestock to ensure their dogs are properly trained to leave them alone? I'm terribly impressed that 2 dogs managed to actually kill a horse.

I don't think I would consider those dogs dangerous to humans at all, but clearly some big steps need to be taken to keep them away from livestock. Although it might be better to get a horse that is used to dogs, and take the dogs and actually train them to leave the horses alone. That's a far more permanent solution. If you can train a dog to leave a roast on the table, you can train a dog not to kill a horse.

It's odd that this is a solution that's just never mentioned.

 

[gsrept]

its not a snake so that makes it ok they will just move on and keep coming after the reptile industry

 

[bigjej]

I have a hard time believing the story.

 

[TailsWithScales]

I don't have a hard time believing the story. Two dogs especially one being the size of an American bull dog could could run down a horse and lame and kill it. Look how small African wild dogs are (about 60 - 70 lbs) and the size of prey only two dogs can bring down. Boxers are a good 60lb. American Bull dogs (at least here) easily push well over 100lbs.

Heartbreaking on all fronts but I do agree that both dogs should be destroyed and the owner of the dogs held fully, 100% liable. The dog owner even stated the dogs were horse aggressive. She knew this and they still got out.

I'm a dog owner but I don't feel it's right to keep these dogs alive.

 

[sschind]

Wow, that third option is just plain stupid. Oh, you mean I can keep my vicious killer dog if I just pay $300.00 a year? Will that buy me a get out of jail free card the next time my dog escapes and kills something else?

ANY dog that kills something like this on someone else's property needs to be destroyed. It shows two things, 1) the owners can not contain the dog so they have no right to own one (much less a dangerous one) and 2) the dogs are a danger. Maybe not to people but to property these dogs ARE dangerous

If the horse and rider were on the dogs property and the dogs were contained I still think they should be destroyed but I wouldn't be so harsh on the owner. As it stands the owner should have to pay reparations, and be barred from owning any other dogs. She has shown she can not keep them contained.

 

[LauraB]

I'm terribly impressed that 2 dogs managed to actually kill a horse.

With all due respect, if you were one of the riders and horse owners who were probably terrorized by the attack and had to witness your slaughtered horse, you might not be so impressed.

That particular development in Naples is horse "friendly". There are riding trails just for equestrians and horses are welcomed. As already stated, the dog owner knew her dogs were horse aggressive, so there may have been previous incidents between her animals & resident horses. And yet, the dogs were still running loose.

They are dangerous. Even if not to humans now, who knows what they might view as "prey" down the road. Canine pack mentality is innate; training is moot at this point and the dogs present a clear danger, IMO.

 

[WingedWolf]

That's just silly, and untrue. Training is not moot, and the dogs do not pose a danger to humans simply because they attacked a horse. This shows a lack of understanding of dog psychology. This is the same idea that's led to dogs involved in pit fighting or that have attacked other dogs or pets being euthanized without any chance at all.

Yet experienced dog trainers have SHOWN that dogs that have engaged in those behaviors in the past CAN be trained, and can become trustworthy.
Canine pack mentality is innate--and THE HUMAN IS THE PACK LEADER.

Now, I am not just pulling this out of thin air. Dogs have been bred for thousands of years to aid humans in hunting. Dogs are trained to hunt deer, wolves, wild boar, and other large game, alongside humans. There's a reason it's called a 'wolfhound', or a 'deerhound'. Dogs that hunt in packs and drag down deer do not pose a danger to human beings. A horse is NO different from a deer. The fault lies with the human owner who knew her dogs were keen to hunt horses, and DID NOTHING. Training them not to do it is NOT DIFFICULT. It's not even difficult now that they have done it once.

Anyone who thinks you cannot train a dog to leave horses alone once they've killed one must have a terribly unruly dog who can't be trusted with a roast sitting on the kitchen table. It's the same thing. You train the dog to avoid the temptation and to leave it alone. It isn't going to be different just because another dog is there, so long as you are training the other dog TOO. It isn't going to be different just because they killed something--this isn't some act that turns animals into feral ravening brutes out for blood.

As for my opinion if it were my horse--I would be heartbroken to lose a horse I cared about, I'd be angry and would demand monetary restitution from the owner, and I would want the dogs to be properly contained, and trained so that it would never happen again.
I would not want them euthanized--this was not their fault.
I would still be impressed that 2 dogs managed to take down a horse, as horses are not easy prey for canines (much less so than a deer).

 

[Heart4Dragonz]

Even if she doesn't have them put to sleep, and does try to "train" them not to be aggressive toward horses, they should still be removed from that area until it's proven they wouldn't try it again, and even then it's not a guarantee how'd they react once back at home. They shouldn't be kept around horses period. There's plenty of cities, and not so equestrian involved places in Florida, and RESPONSIBLE Pet owners.
She knew they were horse aggressive, she knew she lived in a very horse friendly area, she should've taken more precautions to prevent something this horrible from happening.

 

[WingedWolf]

Yes, she should have, and so she should be fined, and she should have to pay restitution for it. But that doesn't mean the dogs should be killed.
There are no quotes around the word 'train' necessary there. Training dogs not to be aggressive towards something (anything) isn't actually all that difficult. If you need help, there are many books on the subject, and even videos. It takes repetition and patience, sure--but there's no reason those dogs couldn't participate in horse shows some day, if they were properly taught.
Might be a great thing to do--have them carrying a banner walking in front of the horses, to show everyone that aggressive dogs don't have to remain that way, and don't deserve to be killed over their lack of training.

The question isn't whether or not the owner is to blame--clearly, the owner is to blame on all counts.
That doesn't mean the dogs are to blame, and they do not deserve to be punished for having a bad owner. They deserve rehabilitation and a loving home.

 

[Archie Bottoms]

Any animal that kills livestock or is livestock aggressive should be killed.

 

[Heart4Dragonz]

I'm pretty sure if I were to ask anyone I know who owns a horse, if they would want a dog that has been aggresive toward a horse, and in fact took one down and killed it, if they would allow me to test out my dog I've re-trained to not be aggresive toward horses, I would get a pretty big NO, I've owned horses, my family in has been very equestrian involved for the past 2 generations, now going on 3, and these horses are like their children, they wouldn't take the slightest risk just to test it out unless that thing had a muzzle on.
I'm still gonna go with if they aren't put down, they need to be removed to an area where horses won't be a worry, and have responsible owners that will be proactive knowing these dogs have some aggression issues.
I love all animals alike, I wouldn't want one to be put down just becuase they have a problem with another animal and their owners aren't or didn't do anything about it before it was too late, I understand you can't blame the dogs, and they DO deserve a chance with a better more responsible owner, but usally it's one strike and you're out in these situations.

 

[WebSlave]

Personally, if it were me and I felt any training needed to be done, I would train my horses to not flinch or bolt if I fired a gun while riding them. Then the solution to being attacked by ANY animal, two or four legged, becomes obvious.

Of course, living in a state where you are "allowed" to exercise your RIGHT of self defense does help quite a bit.

This is actually pertinent as Connie and I just bought bicycles and will be riding trails here in north Florida. Years ago we went riding bikes on vacation (when we used to have time for such things) in south Florida and had dogs chase us. About scared Connie to death and the she didn't want to do any more bike riding for fear of the dogs. Not sure if the dogs would have actually bitten us, but I'm not willing to take that chance. You get bitten by a dog that then just vanishes on you, you've probably got a series of rabies shots to look forward to.

 

[pitbulllady]

Two important things to consider here-and yes, I've owned, trained and worked with many large-breed dogs over the years, so I DO know a thing or two about dogs and dog behavior.

ONE-Prey-based animal aggression IS NOT THE SAME AS AGGRESSION TOWARDS HUMANS! I have always had major problems with the asinine assumption that if a dog goes after or kills other animals, it will eventually "turn on" a human! Many, many dogs are bred and actually still used to hunt down and kill other animals, including some animals that are quite dangerous themselves, yet do not display aggressive behavior towards people. Anyone who has ever seen a Coonhound go at it with a big boar 'coon would surely assume that dog would rip a human to shreds, but normally these dogs are big babies who don't even have a well-developed guarding instinct, just an powerful urge to tear into a raccoon or other small furry animal. All dogs are just mutated wolves; they are the same species, and it's the natural inclination of a wolf-or most domesticated wolves, in this case-to chase and kill hoofed prey. To most large dogs, a horse is a bison is a deer. A friend of mine had a Catahoula Leopard Dog which, alone and unaided by any other dogs, attacked and killed a fully-grown Zebu bull, wearing it down until the bull went into shock from loss of blood. One dog, weighing around 85 pounds, did that, yet this dog lived out a normal dog lifespan letting the owner's kids climb all over him. An abandoned Akita killed TWO horses belonging to a neighbor down the road a bit where I lived 18 years ago. Now, we have dogs being declared "vicious" for chasing free-ranging cats and squirrels! Yes, a dog is the owner's responsibility, and dog owners should be held responsible when a dog harms or kills someone's domesticated animals, but I refuse to buy into that notion that aggression towards other animals makes a dog dangerous to people or "vicious" by default. That's Animal Rightist's thinking, geared towards making it harder and harder to have a dog of any kind, period, and designed to hold animals accountable for HUMAN'S moral standards. It shows a profound lack of knowledge about dog behavior, and animal behavior in general.

By that same token, I've seen many horses who would stomp, bite and kick any dog that they could get ahold of to death. My sister has such a horse. That horse cannot be ridden anywhere there are dogs, even dogs that are confined to a yard, because she'll ignore her rider to go into that yard and kill those dogs, so deep is her hatred of dogs! If some of you believe that a dog should be destroyed for displaying normal and natural canine behavior, should this horse also be destroyed, even though she's a calm and gentle trail horse otherwise, when canines aren't around?

TWO-Few things p*** me off more than for some lame-brained reporter or other brainwashed moron to automatically label ANY dog involved in some negative incident a "pit bull"! Nine times out of ten, the dog is NOT an American Pit Bull Terrier or even a confirmed mix of one, but nonetheless, the typical reaction is to call it a "pit bull". The dogs involved here were an AMERICAN BULLDOG and a BOXER, neither of which are "pit bulls"! THIS mentality is why the "statistics" seem to show that "pit bulls"(which is not even a breed)are involved in a disproportionate number of attacks and bites on people; a dog might have been a Standard Poodle when he woke up in the morning, but as soon as he bites someone later that day, he automatically becomes a "pit bull" by that afternoon! Even in cases where the victim was killed, or was too young to describe the dog(s) involved, and NO ONE ELSE witnessed the attack, the attack is still inevitably blamed on "pit bulls". The first post in this thread, while simply reiterating a news media report, is a case in point.

S.A. McKenzie

 

[TailsWithScales]

ONE-Prey-based animal aggression IS NOT THE SAME AS AGGRESSION TOWARDS HUMANS! I have always had major problems with the asinine assumption that if a dog goes after or kills other animals, it will eventually "turn on" a human! Many, many dogs are bred and actually still used to hunt down and kill other animals, including some animals that are quite dangerous themselves, yet do not display aggressive behavior towards people. Anyone who has ever seen a Coonhound go at it with a big boar 'coon would surely assume that dog would rip a human to shreds, but normally these dogs are big babies who don't even have a well-developed guarding instinct, just an powerful urge to tear into a raccoon or other small furry animal. All dogs are just mutated wolves; they are the same species, and it's the natural inclination of a wolf-or most domesticated wolves, in this case-to chase and kill hoofed prey. To most large dogs, a horse is a bison is a deer. A friend of mine had a Catahoula Leopard Dog which, alone and unaided by any other dogs, attacked and killed a fully-grown Zebu bull, wearing it down until the bull went into shock from loss of blood. One dog, weighing around 85 pounds, did that, yet this dog lived out a normal dog lifespan letting the owner's kids climb all over him. An abandoned Akita killed TWO horses belonging to a neighbor down the road a bit where I lived 18 years ago. Now, we have dogs being declared "vicious" for chasing free-ranging cats and squirrels! Yes, a dog is the owner's responsibility, and dog owners should be held responsible when a dog harms or kills someone's domesticated animals, but I refuse to buy into that notion that aggression towards other animals makes a dog dangerous to people or "vicious" by default. That's Animal Rightist's thinking, geared towards making it harder and harder to have a dog of any kind, period, and designed to hold animals accountable for HUMAN'S moral standards. It shows a profound lack of knowledge about dog behavior, and animal behavior in general.

By that same token, I've seen many horses who would stomp, bite and kick any dog that they could get ahold of to death. My sister has such a horse. That horse cannot be ridden anywhere there are dogs, even dogs that are confined to a yard, because she'll ignore her rider to go into that yard and kill those dogs, so deep is her hatred of dogs! If some of you believe that a dog should be destroyed for displaying normal and natural canine behavior, should this horse also be destroyed, even though she's a calm and gentle trail horse otherwise, when canines aren't around?

I was born and raised around hunting dogs and large breeds all my life and yes there's a huge difference between prey drive and a true dangerous dog.
Yes I said the animal should be destroyed. But this is simply based on the fact that the dogs' owner KNEW these dogs (especially the American Bulldog) were horse aggressive and they still escaped their yard and had escaped before this accident occurred. That's negligence on the owners part. The dogs should be rehomed or destroyed because the chances of these dogs getting out and harming someone elses horse is a probability. Not to mention that chance of the horse having a rider who is subsequently injured or killed from being thrown. Yes it may still be prey drive but now there isn't just an animal injury or fatality but a human has been thrown into the mix. The owner's negligence is why it should be destroyed or rehomed.

I also have seen hunting dogs whom have such a huge prey drive they become completely blinded to anything but the hunt and yes have attacked humans in the process. A good friend of mine has some hunting dogs that he uses for boar, bear and mountain lion. Those dogs get so engrossed in the hunt and so prey driven that during the hunt and when it's over a human cannot get near them safely until they've calmed down. He even has a hard time pulling the one male dog off the prey once it's downed and has to chain him to a tree for 15 to 20 minutes because he's a danger to those around him. That's the danger! Not them going to turn on anyone. Prey drive is blinding at times with some animals and in turn can make them very dangerous to other animals or humans around them. Misdirection does and has happened.

And Pit bulls are a breed. It's the American Pitbull Terrier. They're recognized by every organization as a true breed except the AKC (American Kennel Club). Catahoula's are a true breed in fact they're are America's original breed and they're also recognized by every organization except the AKC.

 

[pitbulllady]

I was born and raised around hunting dogs and large breeds all my life and yes there's a huge difference between prey drive and a true dangerous dog.
Yes I said the animal should be destroyed. But this is simply based on the fact that the dogs' owner KNEW these dogs (especially the American Bulldog) were horse aggressive and they still escaped their yard and had escaped before this accident occurred. That's negligence on the owners part. The dogs should be rehomed or destroyed because the chances of these dogs getting out and harming someone elses horse is a probability. Not to mention that chance of the horse having a rider who is subsequently injured or killed from being thrown. Yes it may still be prey drive but now there isn't just an animal injury or fatality but a human has been thrown into the mix. The owner's negligence is why it should be destroyed or rehomed.

I also have seen hunting dogs whom have such a huge prey drive they become completely blinded to anything but the hunt and yes have attacked humans in the process. A good friend of mine has some hunting dogs that he uses for boar, bear and mountain lion. Those dogs get so engrossed in the hunt and so prey driven that during the hunt and when it's over a human cannot get near them safely until they've calmed down. He even has a hard time pulling the one male dog off the prey once it's downed and has to chain him to a tree for 15 to 20 minutes because he's a danger to those around him. That's the danger! Not them going to turn on anyone. Prey drive is blinding at times with some animals and in turn can make them very dangerous to other animals or humans around them. Misdirection does and has happened.

And Pit bulls are a breed. It's the American Pitbull Terrier. They're recognized by every organization as a true breed except the AKC (American Kennel Club). Catahoula's are a true breed in fact they're are America's original breed and they're also recognized by every organization except the AKC.

The term "pit bull" has now come to mean any short-haired, medium-to-large dog, any dog that does something bad, or scares someone, regardless of size. A "pit bull" can be anything from a purebred American Pit Bull Terrier to a mongrel of completely indeterminate genes, which means basically, that a "pit bull" can be virtually ANY dog. That negates the use of that word as meaning just an American Pit Bull Terrier, or any other purebred dog. It's a pointless, useless media term, as the initial report of this dog-horse incident proves. Catahoula Leopard Dogs are NOT "America's original breed", as their primary ancestors are European Molosser-type dogs. Domesticated dogs existed in North American long before the first European ever imagined this continent existed, and at least one of those dogs, the Carolina Dog, still exists today. The AKC DOES, in fact, recognize the American Pit Bull Terrier, just not under that name. Every single American Staffordshire Terrier is a direct decendant, with no other breeds added, of game-bred UKC and ADBA-registered APBT's, and the stud books remained open until 1974. The name change was done to appease the Bull Terrier Club of America(the funny-looking Spuds McKenzie-type breed), who opposed the addition of another breed with "bull terrier" as part of its name. Both UKC and ADBA will still single-register AKC AmStaffs as American Pit Bull Terriers and do not recognize them as a separate breed.

If an owner cannot control their animals, the OWNER should be punished, unless the dog clearly presents a threat to humans. Most dogs do in fact exhibit some form of animal aggression, and if you killed every dog that would chase, attack and kill another animal if given the opportunity, you'd be left with only stuffed toy dogs. It was the owner's responsibility to keep those dogs confined, whether or not she knew they were horse-aggressive(and MOST dogs are to some extent unless they've been raised around horses), and she failed to do so, but this whole notion of killing dogs for acting like dogs and doing things which are natural for dogs to do is seriously getting out of hand. It's part of that whole AR mentality that holds animals responsible for acting like animals, for failing to show the moral judgements that we naturally expect to accompany having "rights". The "thought-process"(and I use that term loosely, since little actual thinking is involved)that any dog which kills or acts aggressively towards any other animals is "vicious" by default and must suffer the ultimate punishment is part of the bigger picture, one that is intended to make dog ownership as difficult as possible. Dog looks a certain way-kill it. Dog chases cats or kills squirrels-kill it. Dog barks at people passing in front of the yard-kill it. Dog fails to act like anything other than a four-legged human, kill it. What dogs are left?

S.A. McKenzie

 

[Wolfy-hound]

Dogs do not in fact HAVE to be animal aggressive, nor do they have to be unruly or uncontrolled.

My dogs don't chase animals, don't chase at people, don't get out and terrorize the neighborhood or other animals. I've never owned a dog yet that chased horses and I've owned a few.

Punishing the owner how? Give them a fine they most likely won't pay so that the dogs can get out AGAIN and maul some other animal, horse or other? I know.. let's put them into a new home.. never mind that there's plenty of dogs that don't kill other animals sitting in shelters waiting for homes. Let's just say that all dogs should kill other animals whenever they want to.. and hey.. if it gets into your yard and kills your dog which WAS contained.. oh well, that's just dogs being dogs.

Dogs that go after prey intensely can turn that into a aggression problem against people, especailly small children. I've seen many dogs that are animal aggressive in some way, even if it's just chasing cats or chickens.. that then end up biting a kid, because small kids act like prey animals. They run, make high pitch noises and flail around in a intensely interesting manner. If the owner wants to own a dog which has a high prey drive like certain breeds bred to hunt, then they have to be responsible, or risk having the dog seized and put down when it becomes uncontrolled.

If someone's dog comes into MY fenced yard.. or comes up to me in a public area, and attacks me or my leashed pet.. I want something done. I don't want to hear.. "Oh, we gave them a fine" and then the dog is out again to attack me or my pet or someone else's pet again. Maybe that's fine for you.. to have your pets torn up by someone's uncontrolled high-prey-drive animal.. but not to me.. and not to most of my clients either.

I know several people with hunting dogs.. and they keep them contained and trained. On the occasion that one has gotten loose and attacked livestock, including horses, they have been put down. If they have a dog that will chase and attack livestock, they put it down.. they don't then just hope it won't get loose and attack someone else's livestock. Most of the hunting dogs(including dogs that go after deer and hog) are perfectly fine animals and do not chase horses or anything else. They are 'set' onto deer or hogs to trail them and/or corner them. They aren't slavering beasts waiting for anything with fur to appear so they can jump it.

If I were that horse's owner, I would absolutley want to insist that the dogs BOTH be put down.. no matter what breed they are. I don't care if it's pit bull, or cocker spaniel.. it should be "blame the dog, not the breed". The owner of the dogs should be held accountable for endangering the girl and also be billed for the expenses, and for the value of the horse as well.