VA - Bethany Stephens, 21, mauled to death by her 2 dogs, Dec 2017

[Deleted member 158085]

I live in a poor county, poor town. Most of the dogs are not licensed, and behind in their shots despite county wide programs for free neuter and rabies vaccines. We have a very active shelter that is comprised mainly of Pitbulls and several cat programs abound. Feral, stray and outdoor cats a big problem though a lot of people pitching in to get them neutered. Neighbor down the street caught over 50 of them and brought them to free neuter clinic this year. Too many intact dogs, especially pits. Good news very few dog attacks on people over last 40!yests despite the prevalence of pit mix dogs but s lot of dogs attacked

My husband grew up here and said that this large number of pit mix dogs is new. The mutts when he was growing up were shepherd and lab mixes. You could find cheap dogs for sale or give always easily then within the neighborhood. Going to a shelter for a dog, getting a “rescue” dog was a foreign idea. Stray dogs did exist abound and even fewer people leashed their dogs those days. His dog often got loose and ran with the dog gangs. Though dog fights happened, they were within those gangs and he doesn’t remember being nervous about loose dogs. They did not tend to stack leashed dogs walking with owners. These days I walk with pepper spray not for my protection but for my dogs’. I want a fence as. much to keep other dogs out as I do to keep my dogs in my yard

The less affluent areas of town tend to have the pit mixes. I think they hdvd become the dog of choice for those with seriously low income. The shelters will offer deals on pit mixes to get them into homes, and the mix also seems to be what backyard breeders are selling. That’s why the number of these dogs are going up and sadly that’s why there are so many dire incidents involving them. If you go through Wikipedia’d List of dog bite fatalities, you can see the dominance of Pitbull mixes take over that list over time. If you read a bit more about the attacks, it becomes clear that a majority of them occur with dogs involved that are in marginal situations. I was struck by that realization. And not all cases have that extra background info.

No doubt many of these dogs with Pitbull ancestry have atttibutes that make them challenging dog. Their raw strength per pound, for starters. Walking a 50 lb Pitbull is a whole other experience over most other breeds. Then their powerful jaws, prey drive, speed and focus. These dogs need training, consistent discipline, and should never run loose. More so than many other breeds because the consequences can be more severe. It’s the same case for all dogs really, but the stakes are ramped up with certain breeds, and dogs with a lot of pit in them tend to be in that group. But where it becomes an issue with these dogs is that too many of their owners hone these characteristics that can make them dangerous and they are not as careful with these dogs. Around my street, the owners are very careful with their dogs, leashing them and keeping them in their yards. Not do much in some other neighborhoods where too many pit owners seem to revel in the fact that they have scary dogs instead of being extra careful.

Where Bethany fell in this spectrum is a mystery. All reports about how she cared for those dogs indicate that she worked for dog trainers and vets, and knew how to train and care for her dogs. They got excellent care. Until recently when events in her life were such that she could not keep them with her, so she stuck them in outdoor pens at her father’s and visited them not even Daily. With her father refusing to take the responsibility or care of them. Probably part of Deal she struck to get him to allow her to House the dogs. there. I’m sure she looked at this as temporary and intended to get her dogs back into a home and life with her again.

How much the change in life was part of what led her dogs to attack her, if indeed they were what initiated an attacking on Bethany, we don’t know. I hope LE have very competent folks doing the investigation, including the forensics, so that human intervention in this killing is ruled out. I don’t believe at this point it is despite LE statements to the contrary.

I have relatives who are struggling economically that have numerous pets. The animals seem to have s good quality of life. They simply do not get the vet care, however, if expensive health issues arise. Cant afford so they are put down if they get ailments that make care for them too difficult. But all of their pets are clean, well groomed, look healthy and happy, well behaved. Some are Pitbulls, yes, but none are aggressive though they do tend to have strong prey drives. I think these dogs are not the pit mixes that will attacking other animals and people because of the quality and type of care they are getting. Not so with those that were gotten to be tough and cool, not getting the discipline and training these dogs are getting.

The number of dog bites by pits is really in proportion with the overall number of pits out there. If there were more shepherds than pits again, then it's likely that shepherds would be responsible for the most dog bites again.

This country goes through phases, with certain breeds being more popular for a time. And when a breed becomes more popular, it inevitably becomes overbred and eventually the shelters fill disproportionately with that breed because people get them without researching their needs. I've seen spikes in Dalmatians, Jack Russells, Chihuahuas, etc. in shelters based on what's popular at the time. When I started out in rescue, pits were just becoming popular, so you could still find a lot of other breeds there, including chows. Now I rarely see chows in shelters, and I see fewer rotties, too.

I don't know where you are in the country, but most of my life in rescue was spent in the South. What our shelters are constantly overloaded with now are pure bred Coonhounds and other hounds and pit bulls. I think the entire country is overloaded with pits, but hounds are mostly a southern problem because when they don't hunt correctly, they are left in the woods and end up in shelters. They are not a dog for the faint of heart, either, and we can't seem to keep up with placing them.

I don't care for BSL because it punishes good dogs and owners, not just the bad ones. But even as someone who likes pit bulls, I would not mind seeing laws passed that seriously curb the breeding of them (as well as hounds, honestly) partly because they are also the most abused breed. I hate the idea of good, healthy dogs being put down due to expanding BSL, but I don't mind the idea of a lot fewer being bred when I know many are just going to suffer.

It blows my mind that we live in a country that won't do much to curb breeding because it infringes on rights, yet we have no problem passing BSL, which clearly also infringes on rights. The former solution would not be a painful thing for a human or animal - it's just preventative. But BSL ends up killing dogs and causing emotional trauma to their humans if they can't get moved to a different area fast enough.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[Zelda1010]

Nothing new here except a surprising (to me) expert opinion that the neglected, isolated dogs would have, in his opinion, been happy to see their owner.

http://people.com/crime/virginia-woman-mauled-death-dogs-while-walking-woods/

Polsky was skeptical of the idea, advanced by authorities, that the dogs alleged neglect contributed to their behavior.

“If kept isolated more and more over time, I would imagine these dogs would have been happy to see their owner,” he said, adding, “There had to have been something out there in the environment that triggered this and we don’t know what it was.” [Dr. Richard Polsky, an academically trained expert on animal behavior and dog bites told People.]

 

[Deleted member 158085]

Nothing new here except a surprising (to me) expert opinion that the neglected, isolated dogs would have, in his opinion, been happy to see their owner.

http://people.com/crime/virginia-woman-mauled-death-dogs-while-walking-woods/

Every expert opinion I've seen so far, including this one, states that there must have been a trigger. This is my belief as well.

There seems to be, among pit bull haters, an assumption that an attack would not have happened had they been good dogs. (ETA - not calling you one - just an observation) But having dealt with a very good cat (long before I was in rescue and experienced with animals) for years who had a redirected aggression problem that sent me to the doctor several times, I understand that good animals revert to instinctual reactions quite often. Aggression is most often, as noted by several experts, fear-based.

Humans and other animals all react differently as individuals to fear. Here's an example with humans. If someone sneaks up and scares me, I react with violence. I am not a violent person, but my instinctual reaction is to fight if I perceive a threat. My adrenaline may cause me to hit you. One of my girlfriends has the opposite reaction, which concerned her. A boyfriend thought he'd scare her for fun in a parking lot once by jumping out from behind a car. Her reaction was to cringe and curl into herself rather than to run or fight. She told me that she froze, and it bothered her because she realized that if she was ever truly attacked, she would be a sitting duck.

This would be the case with different dogs as well. There are some who will react to seeing a potential weapon (mops, large flashlights, etc.) by running and hiding. Others react by growling and standing their ground, or depending on their history and personality, even lunging.

Now think about two guys involved in a brawl in a parking lot. If, in the middle of an intense fight someone comes up behind them to grab a shoulder to pull them away, one or both may respond by decking the person, not because they are mean, but because they are in fight mode and fear a separate attack from yet another direction. In dogs and cats, we call this redirected aggression. And this is what I believe happened to Bethany if those dogs did attack and kill her.

A quick couple of examples where I've been bit due to redirected aggression. My cat was watching another cat through the sliding glass door. I didn't realize he perceived this cat as a threat. My other cat came up from behind and got nailed by the first cat. Stupidly, I reached in to stop it and got nailed. Some animals come to their senses quickly. Others stay jacked up and have to be confined until they calm down.

Another time one of my Aussie fosters was having a barking match through the fence with the neighbor's border collie. When I approached, she turned and bit my leg. This, too, was redirected aggression. These things happened when I was young and not very knowledgeable about animal behavior yet.

I have never been bit or snapped at by a pit bull, which is significant considering that during my dog rescue days I rescued more of them than any other identifiable breed, followed by chows, rotties, and large mutts. But yes, pits can do a lot of damage if they do attack. And I'd like to see their breeding regulated simply to prevent so much irresponsible ownership. But I believe this particular attack could have happened if the exact same conditions had existed with any two large dogs.

My best guess on the trigger is that these two dogs, who had a lot of pent up energy and who were regularly experiencing hunger came across something in the woods that they viewed as prey and went for it. They then began to fight over the prey and Bethany attempted to intervene. Even my chickens will fight over a mouse if they find one, and even my chickens can kill each other. So two hungry and anxious large dogs certainly could.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[Zelda1010]

Every expert opinion I've seen so far, including this one, states that there must have been a trigger. This is my belief as well.

There seems to be, among pit bull haters, an assumption that an attack would not have happened had they been good dogs. (ETA - not calling you one - just an observation) But having dealt with a very good cat (long before I was in rescue and experienced with animals) for years who had a redirected aggression problem that sent me to the doctor several times, I understand that good animals revert to instinctual reactions quite often. Aggression is most often, as noted by several experts, fear-based.

Humans and other animals all react differently as individuals to fear. Here's an example with humans. If someone sneaks up and scares me, I react with violence. I am not a violent person, but my instinctual reaction is to fight if I perceive a threat. My adrenaline may cause me to hit you. One of my girlfriends has the opposite reaction, which concerned her. A boyfriend thought he'd scare her for fun in a parking lot once by jumping out from behind a car. Her reaction was to cringe and curl into herself rather than to run or fight. She told me that she froze, and it bothered her because she realized that if she was ever truly attacked, she would be a sitting duck.

This would be the case with different dogs as well. There are some who will react to seeing a potential weapon (mops, large flashlights, etc.) by running and hiding. Others react by growling and standing their ground, or depending on their history and personality, even lunging.

Now think about two guys involved in a brawl in a parking lot. If, in the middle of an intense fight someone comes up behind them to grab a shoulder to pull them away, one or both may respond by decking the person, not because they are mean, but because they are in fight mode and fear a separate attack from yet another direction. In dogs and cats, we call this redirected aggression. And this is what I believe happened to Bethany if those dogs did attack and kill her.

A quick couple of examples where I've been bit due to redirected aggression. My cat was watching another cat through the sliding glass door. I didn't realize he perceived this cat as a threat. My other cat came up from behind and got nailed by the first cat. Stupidly, I reached in to stop it and got nailed. Some animals come to their senses quickly. Others stay jacked up and have to be confined until they calm down.

Another time one of my Aussie fosters was having a barking match through the fence with the neighbor's border collie. When I approached, she turned and bit my leg. This, too, was redirected aggression. These things happened when I was young and not very knowledgeable about animal behavior yet.

I have never been bit or snapped at by a pit bull, which is significant considering that during my dog rescue days I rescued more of them than any other identifiable breed, followed by chows, rotties, and large mutts. But yes, pits can do a lot of damage if they do attack. And I'd like to see their breeding regulated simply to prevent so much irresponsible ownership. But I believe this particular attack could have happened if the exact same conditions had existed with any two large dogs.

My best guess on the trigger is that these two dogs, who had a lot of pent up energy and who were regularly experiencing hunger came across something in the woods that they viewed as prey and went for it. They then began to fight over the prey and Bethany attempted to intervene. Even my chickens will fight over a mouse if they find one, and even my chickens can kill each other. So two hungry and anxious large dogs certainly could.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

I can absolutely see her trying to break up a fight between the dogs and it turning tragic in an instant. I suppose if that fight was over prey, we'll never have definitive proof.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

I do think what most likely happened is the two pits became excited and may have started fighting each other, and Bethany tried her best to intervene while trying to stop them.

I have read the worst thing a human can do is try to break up dogs who are fighting. The dogs are already in the height of aggression at the time and excitement. They may pick up wrong cues and mistakenly think the human trying to stop them is part of the attacks on each other.

This case is just heartbreaking because I do believe Bethany sincerely loved and deeply cared about her two dogs.

I remember years ago we adopted a mix breed who had Mastiff in him. He was a wonderful dog who absolutely adored children. When we adopted him after we found him on our property one day we did notice the many scars he had on his body. We felt he was either grossly abused by his previous unknown owner or may have been used in dog fighting in the past due to his muscular build and large size. Yet he had no aggression against any humans and was deeply loving to everyone. He got along well with our other two dogs at the time. He was loyal, loving, and protective, and such a blessing to all of us.

Once he knew this was his home he did protect his territory and our property. He would never venture beyond our property line but one day two huge pit bulls passed by in the back of a pickup truck and jumped out of the truck to attack Red when they saw him in our yard. I was scared to death and thought for sure they were going to kill him. I felt so helpless but I knew better than to intervene. They fought and it seemed to go on forever. I was so traumatized thinking I was going to see our beloved dog get mauled and killed before my very eyes. Instead of them hurting and killing him he whipped both of their big butts. They made a mistake by both trying to bite his throat but he had folds of loose skin preventing them from doing any damage. Meanwhile he was biting them both, and finally both whimpered, and limped off bloody, and wounded. We never saw them again in our area.

Red had only one gash on his back and we took him to the vet and he healed quickly. We had him for over 10 years after then and no other dogs ever came on our property to attack him. The vet estimated he was around 15 years old when he passed away. He will always have a special place in our hearts. :heart:

 

[jamicat]

The word from friends was that Bethany had adopted one of the dogs as an 8 weeks old pup from a shelter. The other, which was a littermate of the first, she adopted later because it was supposedly being neglected or abused.

The previous owner of that second dog has surfaced and says she gave up that dog because it was showing signs of aggression. Snapping at her, abd she was pregnant at that time. Did not feel safe with it.

If the forensics confirm that she was killed by the dogs, and that no other injuries were inflicted prior to the dog attacks, by humans, then yes, some trigger most certainly occurred for those attacks. Whether the dogs were more or less enamoured with her for her arrival and giving them reprieve from the pens is irrelevant in that some mental and behavioral deterioration certainly occurred from their new setting. Even if they were more subservient than before, something triggered an attack. It could have been breaking up a fight between the two, pulling them away from some nasty carcass or dung they might want to eat, or running or falling, causing one of them to overreact. For some reason, when in a state of high excitement, some dogs lose it and get aggressive if a person takes to the ground. I’ve seen that. And with two dog, pack attack mentality could kick in. But, I don’t think we’ll ever know what happened exactly. What precipitated the attack.

 

[Zelda1010]

I'm having technical difficulties today. Well, fat fingers hitting delete instead of edit.

I have stupidly intervened in dog fights. I half joke that have a PTSD response to dogs getting snarly with each other. In my early twenties I had five dogs and the two females eventually grew to hate each other. I couldn't detach the pit from the mutts neck and I was terrified. I had a stick and I'm screaming my head off for them to stop. The male owner in the home (who had a one on one relationship with the pit before we started playing house) came to the "rescue" and was bit in the arm. As soon as the pit realized what she'd done, she let go of the human and hid under the shed in fear.

The same dog, a few years earlier, had stood by and peed on the floor when the male owner's home was burglarized.

And actually she wasn't a "pit bull terrier" she was also likely a mutt. But I still have a soft spot in my heart for all bully breeds. I'm older now and out of that situation and will never have so many dogs under my roof again. And I'm not even so sure that I'll ever have a big dog under my roof again.

 

[Zelda1010]

I do think what most likely happened is the two pits became excited and may have started fighting each other, and Bethany tried her best to intervene while trying to stop them.

I have read the worst thing a human can do is try to break up dogs who are fighting. The dogs are already in the height of aggression at the time and excitement. They may pick up wrong cues and mistakenly think the human trying to stop them is part of the attacks on each other.

This case is just heartbreaking because I do believe Bethany sincerely loved and deeply cared about her two dogs.

I remember years ago we adopted a mix breed who had Mastiff in him. He was a wonderful dog who absolutely adored children. When we adopted him after we found him on our property one day we did notice the many scars he had on his body. We felt he was either grossly abused by his previous unknown owner or may have been used in dog fighting in the past due to his muscular build and large size. Yet he had no aggression against any humans and was deeply loving to everyone. He got along well with our other two dogs at the time. He was loyal, loving, and protective, and such a blessing to all of us.

Once he knew this was his home he did protect his territory and our property. He would never venture beyond our property line but one day two huge pit bulls passed by in the back of a pickup truck and jumped out of the truck to attack Red when they saw him in our yard. I was scared to death and thought for sure they were going to kill him. I felt so helpless but I knew better than to intervene. They fought and it seemed to go on forever. I was so traumatized thinking I was going to see our beloved dog get mauled and killed before my very eyes. Instead of them hurting and killing him he whipped both of their big butts. They made a mistake by both trying to bite his throat but he had folds of loose skin preventing them from doing any damage. Meanwhile he was biting them both, and finally both whimpered, and limped off bloody, and wounded. We never saw them again in our area.

Red had only one gash on his back and we took him to the vet and he healed quickly. We had him for over 10 years after then and no other dogs ever came on our property to attack him. The vet estimated he was around 15 years old when he passed away. He will always have a special place in our hearts. :heart:

Oh my. My heart is racing just reading this. How awful to watch.

 

[rsd1200]

The number of dog bites by pits is really in proportion with the overall number of pits out there. If there were more shepherds than pits again, then it's likely that shepherds would be responsible for the most dog bites again.

This country goes through phases, with certain breeds being more popular for a time. And when a breed becomes more popular, it inevitably becomes overbred and eventually the shelters fill disproportionately with that breed because people get them without researching their needs. I've seen spikes in Dalmatians, Jack Russells, Chihuahuas, etc. in shelters based on what's popular at the time. When I started out in rescue, pits were just becoming popular, so you could still find a lot of other breeds there, including chows. Now I rarely see chows in shelters, and I see fewer rotties, too.

I don't know where you are in the country, but most of my life in rescue was spent in the South. What our shelters are constantly overloaded with now are pure bred Coonhounds and other hounds and pit bulls. I think the entire country is overloaded with pits, but hounds are mostly a southern problem because when they don't hunt correctly, they are left in the woods and end up in shelters. They are not a dog for the faint of heart, either, and we can't seem to keep up with placing them.

I don't care for BSL because it punishes good dogs and owners, not just the bad ones. But even as someone who likes pit bulls, I would not mind seeing laws passed that seriously curb the breeding of them (as well as hounds, honestly) partly because they are also the most abused breed. I hate the idea of good, healthy dogs being put down due to expanding BSL, but I don't mind the idea of a lot fewer being bred when I know many are just going to suffer.

It blows my mind that we live in a country that won't do much to curb breeding because it infringes on rights, yet we have no problem passing BSL, which clearly also infringes on rights. The former solution would not be a painful thing for a human or animal - it's just preventative. But BSL ends up killing dogs and causing emotional trauma to their humans if they can't get moved to a different area fast enough.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

Our county has implemented a breeder's license. If they catch you selling pups out of your trunk at the local parking lot or hawking them online, they will fine you and inspect you and can take your dogs if your situation is not acceptable. It's at least a step.

I agree with you about the over breeding (same thing happened with German Shepherds and Rotties, they nearly ruined the breed, but they are coming back. I looked far and wide for a reputable breeder for my girl, and my cousin raises a litter of GSDs each year. Gorgeous, well-tempered, dogs. People stand in line to be approved for one.). However, it is the powerful jaws, combined with the tenacity of not turning loose, and the ability to shake and tear, that causes the deaths, behind the pits.

If my cairn mix has a bad hair day and goes after the UPS man, he's going to have an ankle bite, and can kick her to the curb. Not so with a pit bull (or Rottie, or GSD, etc...) and because of the terrier in them, and their initial breeding, as bait dogs, to hold bear, bulls and other large animals, by the head/nose for their human they were bread to amp up that tenacity in the terrier. Then, baiting was outlawed, and humans started pitting the dogs against one another, in pits (hence the name), so they do have this in their bloodline. It's what they were bred to do. Bite & hold. Their prey tries to get loose, the go in again, bite down again, shake, and hold. They don't feel pain, like other dogs, or they ignore the pain.

Just as my shepherd has it in his bloodline to guard my mule. He thinks its his job to ensure that my mule is safe, yet I've never taught him to do that. He just does it. It's what the breed was bred to do. Some people started the pits, who wouldn't fight, as pets, and culling out the aggressive ones, and making them pets. Then again, others would take the pups of these dogs, and turn them into fighters or breed them with fighters. So, fortunately, because of humans, there's a lot of pits out there who were bred as pets, and the bloodline is drawn down, and, again, thanks to humans, there's a lot, whose bloodline are being honed, to fight anything that moves. The bad part is, you can't tell them apart until its too late. That's why I don't think these dogs are for new dog owners, and must have a strong Alpha owner. Shelters should be very careful when passing out pits. I'd had dogs since I was old enough to walk, before I got my first Rottie, and had also studied up on the breed. Something bad could happen tomorrow with my current girl but she's five, and I never take for granted the training I started with her as a puppy. I reinforce almost daily. I then see my friend's young daughter with her obviously joyful pit, who doesn't know a thing, barely his name, but she loves him to pieces, saved him from the shelter. Who am I to say she can't have him? We don't know which humans will turn out to kill. She lives on a populated street and has fixed a yard for him.

I personally don't want one, but that's just me, after having our pit mix as a child. He truly was on the vicious dog list in the county. Thankfully he got old and just started sleeping more, and we'd put him up if we knew company was coming, or we'd have had to have him put down if he bit again, per the county. Even though all but one bite, was on our property, they were not there to harm us. They were guests, except for one and he was a salesman.

https://www.aspca.org/about-us/aspca-policy-and-position-statements/position-statement-pit-bulls

 

[Deleted member 158085]

The word from friends was that Bethany had adopted one of the dogs as an 8 weeks old pup from a shelter. The other, which was a littermate of the first, she adopted later because it was supposedly being neglected or abused.

The previous owner of that second dog has surfaced and says she gave up that dog because it was showing signs of aggression. Snapping at her, abd she was pregnant at that time. Did not feel safe with it.

If the forensics confirm that she was killed by the dogs, and that no other injuries were inflicted prior to the dog attacks, by humans, then yes, some trigger most certainly occurred for those attacks. Whether the dogs were more or less enamoured with her for her arrival and giving them reprieve from the pens is irrelevant in that some mental and behavioral deterioration certainly occurred from their new setting. Even if they were more subservient than before, something triggered an attack. It could have been breaking up a fight between the two, pulling them away from some nasty carcass or dung they might want to eat, or running or falling, causing one of them to overreact. For some reason, when in a state of high excitement, some dogs lose it and get aggressive if a person takes to the ground. I’ve seen that. And with two dog, pack attack mentality could kick in. But, I don’t think we’ll ever know what happened exactly. What precipitated the attack.

This is where we get into murky waters with rescues and shelters. There has been a push for this nation to go no-kill. If Pac-man had not bitten anyone in the past, there could have been a push by volunteers to give him a chance with a more experienced pit bull owner, and they viewed Bethany as someone who fit that bill. She likely knew his history, because the fact that she already had his litter mate and then ended up with him points to her either having involvement with the shelter as a volunteer, or having a friend who worked there. It wasn't sheer coincidence that she ended up with him. Most shelters are going to be honest about any indications of aggression.

That said, after years in rescue I would now make different decisions than I would have 15 years ago. I used to do a lot of rehab with dogs. Now, if that dog needs rehab due to signs of actual aggression (as opposed to just straight up fear), I'm not touching it. Bottom line for me now is that with dozens of pitties in shelters, and mostly very good ones, dozens are going to die each week, so why take the one that has shown any aggression? Same thing with hounds. Dozens will die, so no way I'm taking one that has killed or chased cats or livestock. And I'm also not going to take the nippy little pure bred and leave the perfectly sweet mutt to die instead.

Millions are going to die each year, so for me NOW, rescuing anything with aggression is just non-productive when dogs with no issues will die instead.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[Deleted member 158085]

This is where we get into murky waters with rescues and shelters. There has been a push for this nation to go no-kill. If Pac-man had not bitten anyone in the past, there could have been a push by volunteers to give him a chance with a more experienced pit bull owner, and they viewed Bethany as someone who fit that bill. She likely knew his history, because the fact that she already had his litter mate and then ended up with him points to her either having involvement with the shelter as a volunteer, or having a friend who worked there. It wasn't sheer coincidence that she ended up with him. Most shelters are going to be honest about any indications of aggression.

That said, after years in rescue I would now make different decisions than I would have 15 years ago. I used to do a lot of rehab with dogs. Now, if that dog needs rehab due to signs of actual aggression (as opposed to just straight up fear), I'm not touching it. Bottom line for me now is that with dozens of pitties in shelters, and mostly very good ones, dozens are going to die each week, so why take the one that has shown any aggression? Same thing with hounds. Dozens will die, so no way I'm taking one that has killed or chased cats or livestock. And I'm also not going to take the nippy little pure bred and leave the perfectly sweet mutt to die instead.

Millions are going to die each year, so for me NOW, rescuing anything with aggression is just non-productive when dogs with no issues will die instead.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

I'm also going to point out that as a rescuer I was pretty angry with the rescue who adopted a pit out to that old woman who ended up getting killed by it earlier this year. The minute I heard that they had sent a shock collar to the new home with that dog my hackles went up. That raised major red flags to me.

First, the fact that they send their dogs out with shock collars means two things. First, they regularly use shock collars, which is appalling, and is even more appalling that they do it with pits. Want to trigger a dog with issues? Cause it pain on a regular basis and that will do it. Second, if a dog needs a shock collar to control its behavior, it is not ready for adoption, especially not a big powerful dog going to a frail old woman. There was zero common sense in that decision, and frankly, I hope that situation ended their "rescue."

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[jamicat]

This is where we get into murky waters with rescues and shelters. There has been a push for this nation to go no-kill. If Pac-man had not bitten anyone in the past, there could have been a push by volunteers to give him a chance with a more experienced pit bull owner, and they viewed Bethany as someone who fit that bill. She likely knew his history, because the fact that she already had his litter mate and then ended up with him points to her either having involvement with the shelter as a volunteer, or having a friend who worked there. It wasn't sheer coincidence that she ended up with him. Most shelters are going to be honest about any indications of aggression.

That said, after years in rescue I would now make different decisions than I would have 15 years ago. I used to do a lot of rehab with dogs. Now, if that dog needs rehab due to signs of actual aggression (as opposed to just straight up fear), I'm not touching it. Bottom line for me now is that with dozens of pitties in shelters, and mostly very good ones, dozens are going to die each week, so why take the one that has shown any aggression? Same thing with hounds. Dozens will die, so no way I'm taking one that has killed or chased cats or livestock. And I'm also not going to take the nippy little pure bred and leave the perfectly sweet mutt to die instead.

Millions are going to die each year, so for me NOW, rescuing anything with aggression is just non-productive when dogs with no issues will die instead.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

The former owner of one of Bethany’s dogs said it snapped at her not any big time attacks. That was enough for her to give up the dog. With a baby upcoming, can’t really blame her. It’s one thing for an adult to take chances; a whole other when an infant or mi or is involved.

Bethany had the littermate and was experienced with dogs, at the time had resources, setting and environment to take on the second dog.

I wish we could control irresponsible dog owner but not in the picture here. I agree that such owners are primarily the reason for dog disasters. But in this case, no telling what happened. Such a tragedy.

 

[Zelda1010]

This is where we get into murky waters with rescues and shelters. There has been a push for this nation to go no-kill. If Pac-man had not bitten anyone in the past, there could have been a push by volunteers to give him a chance with a more experienced pit bull owner, and they viewed Bethany as someone who fit that bill. She likely knew his history, because the fact that she already had his litter mate and then ended up with him points to her either having involvement with the shelter as a volunteer, or having a friend who worked there. It wasn't sheer coincidence that she ended up with him. Most shelters are going to be honest about any indications of aggression.

That said, after years in rescue I would now make different decisions than I would have 15 years ago. I used to do a lot of rehab with dogs. Now, if that dog needs rehab due to signs of actual aggression (as opposed to just straight up fear), I'm not touching it. Bottom line for me now is that with dozens of pitties in shelters, and mostly very good ones, dozens are going to die each week, so why take the one that has shown any aggression? Same thing with hounds. Dozens will die, so no way I'm taking one that has killed or chased cats or livestock. And I'm also not going to take the nippy little pure bred and leave the perfectly sweet mutt to die instead.

Millions are going to die each year, so for me NOW, rescuing anything with aggression is just non-productive when dogs with no issues will die instead.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

The experts have mentioned that it is easy for an owner to have a blind spot where it comes to their own pet's aggression and the warning signs. Even, or maybe especially, a young semi-professional owner. There is just no substitute for experience. As you have said it is a perfect storm with Bethany's personal struggles and the dogs' personal struggles. I also hope the forensics are done by a highly qualified professional with some expertise & experience.

 

[Deleted member 158085]

The former owner of one of Bethany’s dogs said it snapped at her not any big time attacks. That was enough for her to give up the dog. With a baby upcoming, can’t really blame her. It’s one thing for an adult to take chances; a whole other when an infant or mi or is involved.

Bethany had the littermate and was experienced with dogs, at the time had resources, setting and environment to take on the second dog.

I wish we could control irresponsible dog owner but not in the picture here. I agree that such owners are primarily the reason for dog disasters. But in this case, no telling what happened. Such a tragedy.

I don't believe I indicated that she was an irresponsible owner at the time she took him. Although to be honest, at 21, she likely wasn't terribly experienced.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[Trident]

This is where we get into murky waters with rescues and shelters. There has been a push for this nation to go no-kill. If Pac-man had not bitten anyone in the past, there could have been a push by volunteers to give him a chance with a more experienced pit bull owner, and they viewed Bethany as someone who fit that bill. She likely knew his history, because the fact that she already had his litter mate and then ended up with him points to her either having involvement with the shelter as a volunteer, or having a friend who worked there. It wasn't sheer coincidence that she ended up with him. Most shelters are going to be honest about any indications of aggression.

That said, after years in rescue I would now make different decisions than I would have 15 years ago. I used to do a lot of rehab with dogs. Now, if that dog needs rehab due to signs of actual aggression (as opposed to just straight up fear), I'm not touching it. Bottom line for me now is that with dozens of pitties in shelters, and mostly very good ones, dozens are going to die each week, so why take the one that has shown any aggression? Same thing with hounds. Dozens will die, so no way I'm taking one that has killed or chased cats or livestock. And I'm also not going to take the nippy little pure bred and leave the perfectly sweet mutt to die instead.

Millions are going to die each year, so for me NOW, rescuing anything with aggression is just non-productive when dogs with no issues will die instead.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

Very intelligent stance. Now, if you/we/the rest of us could convince all rescues and shelters to convert to that line of thinking, we all would be safer. I don't understand the reasoning behind "no kill" shelters in the first place.

 

[Trident]

I'm also going to point out that as a rescuer I was pretty angry with the rescue who adopted a pit out to that old woman who ended up getting killed by it earlier this year. The minute I heard that they had sent a shock collar to the new home with that dog my hackles went up. That raised major red flags to me.

First, the fact that they send their dogs out with shock collars means two things. First, they regularly use shock collars, which is appalling, and is even more appalling that they do it with pits. Want to trigger a dog with issues? Cause it pain on a regular basis and that will do it. Second, if a dog needs a shock collar to control its behavior, it is not ready for adoption, especially not a big powerful dog going to a frail old woman. There was zero common sense in that decision, and frankly, I hope that situation ended their "rescue."

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

I agree, sending a dog out with a shock collar is not a good thing. I'm surprised anyone adopts when they learn what the collar is for.

 

[Deleted member 158085]

Very intelligent stance. Now, if you/we/the rest of us could convince all rescues and shelters to convert to that line of thinking, we all would be safer. I don't understand the reasoning behind "no kill" shelters in the first place.

That is a very heated debate among rescues as well as the general public who don't understand how complicated the solution is. I won't get into it except to say that Nathan Wingrad and his no-kill movement have perpetuated a fairy tale that makes our jobs more difficult and opens us up to vitriol from the public who believes it's truly attainable in the way he describes.

I will also say that when you are young and particularly if you haven't spent a lot of time in an average animal control facility, you are more likely to be guided solely by the heart in your rescue attempts as I was. Once you see perfectly adoptable cats, kittens, dogs and puppies put down week after week, you become more practical. You might start out fostering pregnant dogs and cats in the beginning, and eventually realize it's smarter to have them spayed as long as they aren't terribly pregnant than to bring more unwanted creatures into the world at the expense of those who are already born and will face the needle instead of the unborn. Part of it is about becoming seasoned and perhaps a bit jaded.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[Trident]

That is a very heated debate among rescues as well as the general public who don't understand how complicated the solution is. I won't get into it except to say that Nathan Wingrad and his no-kill movement have perpetuated a fairy tale that makes our jobs more difficult and opens us up to vitriol from the public who believes it's truly attainable in the way he describes.

I will also say that when you are young and particularly if you haven't spent a lot of time in an average animal control facility, you are more likely to be guided solely by the heart in your rescue attempts as I was. Once you see perfectly adoptable cats, kittens, dogs and puppies put down week after week, you become more practical. You might start out fostering pregnant dogs and cats in the beginning, and eventually realize it's smarter to have them spayed as long as they aren't terribly pregnant than to bring more unwanted creatures into the world at the expense of those who are already born and will face the needle instead of the unborn. Part of it is about becoming seasoned and perhaps a bit jaded.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

Not sure "jaded" is the right word. Realistic seems more fitting. I'm giving a link to a woman's story after adopting a young female pit. It was fascinating and the ending leaves one wondering.

My Pit Bull Experience, by Giancarla Churchman
https://www.scribd.com/document/36262816/My-Pit-Bull-Experience-by-Giancarla-Churchman

This is a perfectly safe, somewhat scholarly site.

 

[rsd1200]

This is where we get into murky waters with rescues and shelters. There has been a push for this nation to go no-kill. If Pac-man had not bitten anyone in the past, there could have been a push by volunteers to give him a chance with a more experienced pit bull owner, and they viewed Bethany as someone who fit that bill. She likely knew his history, because the fact that she already had his litter mate and then ended up with him points to her either having involvement with the shelter as a volunteer, or having a friend who worked there. It wasn't sheer coincidence that she ended up with him. Most shelters are going to be honest about any indications of aggression.

That said, after years in rescue I would now make different decisions than I would have 15 years ago. I used to do a lot of rehab with dogs. Now, if that dog needs rehab due to signs of actual aggression (as opposed to just straight up fear), I'm not touching it. Bottom line for me now is that with dozens of pitties in shelters, and mostly very good ones, dozens are going to die each week, so why take the one that has shown any aggression? Same thing with hounds. Dozens will die, so no way I'm taking one that has killed or chased cats or livestock. And I'm also not going to take the nippy little pure bred and leave the perfectly sweet mutt to die instead.

Millions are going to die each year, so for me NOW, rescuing anything with aggression is just non-productive when dogs with no issues will die instead.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

Well said, and totally agree.

 

[rsd1200]

Very intelligent stance. Now, if you/we/the rest of us could convince all rescues and shelters to convert to that line of thinking, we all would be safer. I don't understand the reasoning behind "no kill" shelters in the first place.

Our previous county shelter manager refused to euth unless it was mandated by the court. I've adopted from shelters. I have two shelter dogs right now. A small cairn terrier mix, born at the shelter to a cairn mother, and the shepherd (herding dog mix). I went down to visit the shelter, and ended up with the two aforementioned dogs. There was a recent article in the paper about two pits who had gotten loose and went on a rampage through town, they killed three dogs, on each of those dog's turf, and severely wounded another, who later died. This was not their first merry-go-round either. The judge had ordered them contained until the owner's trial was over and then they were to be euthed. I saw the dogs there when I went to pick up mine, after they'd been fixed. They couldn't even put other dogs in the cages near them. The manager told me she was going to fight the euth order and had been going into the cages, by herself, everyday, to love on them, and test their temperaments so she could prove adoptability. She weighed maybe 90 pounds, soaking wet, and these dogs were at least 100 pound dogs or larger. Their heads were bigger than hers! I really worried about her decision making skills as a manager of the shelter, and for her own safety. She was later replaced...