http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/8906920/Judge-calls-for-ban-on-lion-hunting-dogs-after-savage-attack.html

Anatolians this time, I can understand why the remaining dog wasn't pts as in law there has to be certainty as to the identity of the dog responsible, but wouldn't some sort of control order have been appropriate ?

I'm a bit dubious about some of the "facts" printed about the dogs, do Anatolians reach Dane size and weigh 10st ?, i've only ever met two, and they were no where near Dane size. 

>do Anatolians reach Dane size and weigh 10st?

KC standard for Great Dane: Minimum height of an adult dog over eighteen months: 76 cms (30 ins); bitches: 71 cms (28 ins). Weight, minimum weight over eighteen months: dogs: 54 kgs (120 lbs); bitches: 46 kgs (100 lbs).

KC Standard for the Anatolian: Height: dogs: 74-81 cms (29-32 ins) at the shoulders; bitches: 71-79 cms (28-31 ins). Weight: mature dogs: 50-64 kgs (110-141 lbs); bitches: 41-59 kgs (90-130 lbs).

How horrific for that poor woman :-(   I see one of them had escaped and attacked a man before, if it had been pts then this might never have happened.

I agree; her dog (a GSD cross, so not a small dog) wouldn't have been killed either.

> her dog (a GSD cross, so not a small dog) wouldn't have been killed either.

Very, very sad and the woman was very lucky to have survived.
The really scarey aspect was it was the woman they attacked first rather than her just getting involved with her dogs attack so truly dangerous dogs.
Like the judge, I really can't see any need for these dogs in the UK but I don't understand why he did not apply a restraint on the remaining dog and the dog passed to another owner come to that.

> Like the judge, I really can't see any need for these dogs in the UK

I have met this breed at shows, they are flock guards and normally a well socialised one is a gentle animal not overly reactive.

They are no different to any other dog with a guarding trait, so that logic could apply to many breeds and most dogs.

As usual thsi is poor ownership for which toehrs and the dogs themselves suffer.

The question really should be "why do people feel the need to keep a dog they allow/want to be vicious/aggresive" and look for breeds that may be more easily corrupted to this purpose.

>They are no different to any other dog with a guarding trait, so that logic could apply to many breeds and most dogs.

But they are not all so massive and capable of doing so much harm.

> The question really should be "why do people feel the need to keep a dog they allow/want to be vicious/aggresive" and look for breeds that may be more easily corrupted to this purpose.

Exactly but clearly there are people who do.  There are people that would keep wolves, lions and tigers if we allowed it.

There is also a report in my local paper today - the Lancashire Evening Post - of a 9 month old whippet who had to have her front leg amputated after an attack by a 'bull terrier'.

> But they are not all so massive and capable of doing so much harm.

It was 3 dogs = a pack of dogs. A pack of dogs to not need to be giants to kill another dog and inflict wounds on a human.

There are other breeds that are as big/bigger than the Anatolian, all with guarding instincts. Off the top of my head, (English) Mastiff, Cane Corso, Boerboel, Neo.

Calling for a ban on the breed is an ill-thought knee-jerk reaction. Calling for some sort of regluation for people with dogs over a specific weight may have been more of a help (eg. must be under control in public or else X Y Z will happen to the OWNER)

KC Standard for the Anatolian: Height: dogs: 74-81 cms (29-32 ins) at the shoulders; bitches: 71-79 cms (28-31 ins). Weight: mature dogs: 50-64 kgs (110-141 lbs); bitches: 41-59 kgs (90-130 lbs).

I never realised they were that big, the two I met must have been very poor specimens.

Whole thing seems very unjust, after the first attack those dogs should have had a control order put on them or been pts if the culprit could have been identified.
There doesn't seem to be any blame put on the lodger who was in charge of the dogs at the time, surely they should have been in court too.

> There doesn't seem to be any blame put on the lodger who was in charge of the dogs at the time, surely they should have been in court too.

I agree. If the lodger agreed to look after the dogs then surely they were his/her responsibility.
If someone is walking your dog and doesn't scoop the poop then who gets the fine ? Dog owner or dog walker ?

Truly horrific!

Quite often with dog attacks you can understand what has motivated them, but with all the facts given - I can't get my head round this attack and what made them do it, particularly as it was initially aimed at the poor lady and they're not a breed I'd associate with over aggression.

Does pack mentality come into it here? can docile dogs change into unpredictable killers if they are part of a pack or do they have to have a dodgy temperament to begin with.

I do not understand how the owner was allowed to sell one of the dogs after the attack. surely these dogs should have been in police kennels until court hearings done- or at least under strict legal impposed conditions at home.  Why has that sold dog not been tracked down for its fate to be decided?

more to point why was action not taken the first time one of her dogs attacked someone?

> I can't get my head round this attack and what made them do it

I think it's fairly straight forward, this is a breed bred to protect it's area, their house was nearby and they were alone - patrolling what they considered to be their territory, protecting it from trespassers. In other words doing what they have been bred for generations to do.

We must all always remember what our dogs were bred to do, and take steps to keep everyone else safe if that instinct could involve harming other people or dogs.

> was allowed to sell one of the dogs after the attack.

The term used in the paper is 're-homed' rather than sold.

> and they're not a breed I'd associate with over aggression

Me neither - a trainer at our classes had this breed and my experience of them was they were VERY laid back and we all cheered when they moved any quicker than at a snail's pace :) :) :) They were slim and I'd imagine that, when doing their job, they could move very quickly etc, but I had nothing but good experiences with them :) :)

> more to point why was action not taken the first time one of her dogs attacked someone?

Indeed! That's the part I don't understand.

I seem to remember that recently there was a dog PTS for attacking another dog ( might have been in Scotland ?) yet 3 dogs attack a human and they won't be PTS as 1 has already died, 1 has been re-homed and the Judge can't put the 3rd one down as it can't be proved that this one caused the injuries !
I just don't get it.

> It was 3 dogs = a pack of dogs. A pack of dogs to not need to be giants to kill another dog and inflict wounds on a human.

No, but I doubt that woman would have fared any better against just one of these.

>> Calling for some sort of regluation for people with dogs over a specific weight may have been more of a help (eg. must be under control in public or else X Y Z will happen to the OWNER)

Yes, I would say that is a better idea.

> Calling for some sort of regluation for people with dogs over a specific weight may have been more of a help (eg. must be under control in public or else X Y Z will happen to the OWNER)

Yes, good idea. Dogs will often revert back to their instinct or original purpose - my collies still like to stalk and round things up, the sight hounds chase things that move, retrievers are often to be seen carrying things around. It's up to owners to make them safe for the society we live in.

I've owned 15 borzois over the years and they would all chase/hunt/eat any sort of wild animal. One of them, my current boy, attacked another dog 9 years ago (no serious harm done)- since that day he has never been off lead without a muzzle on except in one very secure field. I also muzzled my other borzoi although he had never shown any sort of aggression, and I won't have another one.

If I were the owner of these dogs after the 1st attack I would have had the dog responsible put to sleep and I would have been very very careful with my other dogs.

In other words doing what they have been bred for generations to do.

They weren't bred to attack humans.  Their initial and sustained attack was on the lady, and then the dog.  They had also attacked another person.

I can accept that they were guarding what they saw as territory, but the people attacking seems a bit rogue and I wonder if something about the people triggered them.

> I can accept that they were guarding what they saw as territory, but the people attacking seems a bit rogue and I wonder if something about the people triggered them.

I don't know, sometimes instinct flips over onto something else - pitbulls were bred to fight dogs but occasionally attack and kill people. Borzois were bred to chase wolves but will also chase plastic bags that blow in the wind. Collies were bred to herd sheep but will occasionally herd people.

One of them had already bitten a person and initially it was only one of them that attacked the woman.

It scares me that we don't know which dog was rehomed and which the owners still have - there could be a family out there with a large powerful dog with a history of human attacks and they may not know about it.

Apparently the owner is a breed note writer (I just double checked and she is) so most likely somebody well into the breed with plenty of experience etc -not your average irresponsible dog owner. I guess we all can make errors of judgement at times, in this case with who to trust the dogs whilst the owners were away. As usual the papers only report one side of the story and we can't really know what's what. It's a tragedy but essentially an accident -can anyone of us say we know for certain our dogs (at least large dogs of guarding breeds) would not do anything similar if 3 of them escaped and acted as a pack?  It's not something we'll ever try out. We assume and hope they would not but we can't be certain.

I don't think that's an excuse at all. If one of mine escaped and attacked a person they would be put to sleep. To do it twice is inconceivable.

Just because the owner is a breed note writer it doesn't change my opinion one bit.

Also my garden is completely secure, I would spend money on a good fence before anything else. How did they 'escape' twice?

How awful. I used to meet one in our park in Enfield, Henry my Cavalier adored it, he always preferred to play with big dogs rather than anything near his own size. But I guess 3 of them just formed a pack. :-(

Just because the owner is a breed note writer it doesn't change my opinion one bit.

The owner wasn't even in the same country! How can that be her fault? The person in charge may have left the gate open -simple as that, we don't know so we can't judge!

If one of mine escaped and attacked a person they would be put to sleep.

Even if you had no way of knowing which dog out of 3 did it?

> I seem to remember that recently there was a dog PTS for attacking another dog ( might have been in Scotland ?) yet 3 dogs attack a human and they won't be PTS as 1 has already died, 1 has been re-homed and the Judge can't put the 3rd one down as it can't be proved that this one caused the injuries !
> I just don't get it.

I suspect it is an owner with a great deal of money to pay for a top defense legal team.
I am utterly staggered & horrified that the sold or rehomed one is still out there with no restrictions placed upon it.
appears no restrictions placed on the owner of these dogs either - after 2 attacks when her dogs have escaped I would have hoped some kind of penalty would be placed on her regarding ownership of larger dogs. or at least the need for secure fenceing.

> The owner wasn't even in the same country! How can that be her fault?

From The Telegraph report :-

>Simon Morgan, prosecuting, said Avery had not fulfilled her responsibility to leave the animals in the care of someone who could adequately supervise them each day.

> I think it's fairly straight forward, this is a breed bred to protect it's area, their house was nearby and they were alone - patrolling what they considered to be their territory, protecting it from trespassers. In other words doing what they have been bred for generations to do.

They have been and still are also bred to only react to a potential threat with the absolute minimum of force necessary - these 3 did not do that.

I agree with others who've said the lodger should not have been in charge - not sure I agree with them being sent to court also but they certainly shouldn't have been left to care for these extremely specialised dogs.

Ditto 2 of the dogs being gone already, I'm surprised nothing's been done about that - I would be extremely concerned about where they've gone and to what type of people.  I am also not comfortable with the woman being left in control of even just one - one Anatolian is still an incredibly powerful dog and she's clearly incapable of controlling them.

Imo articles like this can fall into the wrong hands and highlight how dangerous a certain breed can be. Like that girl who was killed in america by the presa canarios and the next thing you knew people were contacting the owners of the dogs to try and get pups. The next thing you might see is byb trying to get hold of one or two of these large dogs to try and breed them. if you look on gumtree there is all sorts of terrifying crossbreeds. The law really doesnt work imo and new legislation regarding owning powerful dogs needs rushed through parliament asap

> I think it's fairly straight forward, this is a breed bred to protect it's area, their house was nearby and they were alone - patrolling what they considered to be their territory, protecting it from trespassers. In other words doing what they have been bred for generations to do.

After reading the story this is how I have viewed it too. I've not read many of the above posts, but saw yours and thought ooh someone else thinking the same. 500yrds is not far from the home, especially if they normally have a lot of land to roam on. How the dogs got out has to be questionned.. !!

> Apparently the owner is a breed note writer (I just double checked and she is) so most likely somebody well into the breed with plenty of experience etc -not your average irresponsible dog owner.

to me this actually makes the fact the dogs attacked on 2 seperate occasions even worse. this is someone who should know better

I really am puzzled why the dogs were not destroyed. plenty of poor staffies and pitbull types get ordered to be destroyed every year for doing less- why those and not these?

The report I read in yesterday's regional newspaper said that since the attack one dog had been sold, and one PTS. So maybe it was known which one was the attacking dog.

The ones ive read say it later died but doesnt say why, could it of had some sort of helath problem which may have caused the attacks? As the artical said one attacked the lady first then the others joined in on her dog, and one of them had bitten someone befor.

> The next thing you might see is byb trying to get hold of one or two of these large dogs to try and breed them.

Some people are already doing that.  There was one handed in to my local rescue last year, he had been living at the back of a kebab shop, not walked and being fed kebabs and nothing else.  Poor lad was bored stupid, untrained and very, very ill :-( No way a decent breeder would have let that happen and when I alerted breed rescue, he wasn't from any of them.

There are not many breeders (maybe half a dozen good ones, I've met 3) but the few there are (setting aside the maybe 2 or 3 dodgy ones) are very, very stringent about where their pups go because of how specialised the breed is - I would be very surprised if they had knowingly sold 3 to this woman unless she was not 100% honest about her setup.

> The report I read in yesterday's regional newspaper said that since the attack one dog had been sold, and one PTS.

Apologies, I just re-read the newspaper article I saw and it "had died" - no mention of PTS.
http://www.thisissomerset.co.uk/Surgery-need-Somerset-dog-attack/story-13919193-detail/story.html

Nikita - The breed has been popular with Turkish expatriots in the UK for some time. I used to know someone who owned the breed, I think her first one was acquired as a pup, but her subsequent ones were all rescues. About 12 years ago she had one that had been kept as a guard dog by the owner of a Turkish nightclub/gambling den in North London.

> but the few there are (setting aside the maybe 2 or 3 dodgy ones) are very, very stringent about where their pups go because of how specialised the breed is - I would be very surprised if they had knowingly sold 3 to this woman unless she was not 100% honest about her setup.

As the breed note writer I would imagine she has some standing in the breed.

I have read this with interest. While i always take what i read in papers with a liberal dash of cynicism, i can confirm that there are quite a few anatolian shepherds in north london. Those i have seen are kept on lead and are often used as guards in factory estates and warehouses where they either roam free or are chained out front. This is pretty typical of the area since my childhood, although then i recall the breed of choice being rotties. Last summer my parents who live in north london witnessed a pair of anatolians, that had escaped from a garden on their residential road, attack and kill a jack russell terrier that was being walked by its elderly owner. It was the most horrific thing that they had ever seen, the little dog was torn to shreds.  The poor lady was powerless and of course absolutely distraught. I do have to add that the terrier was the one that kicked it all off and had a reputation for doing so. What became of the straying dogs? Well my parents didn't find out any more as the two dogs had been staying with someone on the road while their owner was on holiday and needless to say the dogs had disappeared promptly when news got back to the minders. I'm not convinced that the problem that is being highlighted is with the breed of dog, but rather the problem is with the arrangements for care of the dogs which should be appropriate to their needs?

Anyone else notice the title of thr article 'Lion Hunting dogs' would be 'Ridgebacks' not Anatol;ians, they can't even get that straight.

"Judge Julian Lambert, sentencing her at Bristol Crown Court on Monday, called on the rare dogs - used to guard sheep in Asia and bred to bring down lions - to be banned."

Ridgebacks were never bred to combat lions but to track a range of big game including lions and distract them to buy time for the hunter without suffering injury themselves.  Anatolians were bred to defend flocks from hunters including mountain lions, often working independantly, without the back up of a human with a gun, so this may well have involved combat, and so it is an accurate title. Even if it is newspaper speak!

Wasn't aware there were lions in Turkey though, even mountain lions.

> Anyone else notice the title of thr article 'Lion Hunting dogs' would be 'Ridgebacks' not Anatol;ians, they can't even get that straight.

Yes I did notice! And I believe they are mainly flock-guardians in their native country (same as other breeds such as Maremmas, Komondors etc in theirs) brought up with the flocks. I went to a pet exhibition in the late 80's in Ardingly where they had a special display of Anatolians - there weren't that many in the country then - some were original imports with cropped ears and tails, and one was even wearing an original iron spiked collar meant to stop wolves from getting a hold on the dog when it's out doing its job in the mountains.

So perhaps not the most sociable of dogs, but those I met that my friend had (I met two of hers over the years) were not aggressive or unfriendly to welcome visitors. However she did say they needed and wanted to live outside; she had a very large garden with secure fencing, and she told me they patrol the boundaries regularly during the night.

At that time I was living in North London myself, but if there were any local to me they must have been kept locked away.

Wasn't aware there were lions in Turkey though, even mountain lions.  It seems that Mountain Lions are based in the Americas http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cougar

Anyone else notice the title of thr article 'Lion Hunting dogs' would be 'Ridgebacks' not Anatol;ians, they can't even get that straight.

Indeed -which is why we shouldn't judge anyone based on what is written in the general papers. If we did, then we should of course also ban all cavaliers from being bred (because show people have made their brains too big), all Boxers (because they all have epilepsy, don't they?) etc etc. None of us know what happened, not for sure, the papers cherry pick what they write to make the biggest impact. And I find it quite distasteful that some people seem to think it's okay to say a KC recognised breed has no place in society (or whatever was said -haven't time right now to go back and check, but the inference was something similar) -if we, as dog people, can say something like that, then what hope is there for pedigree dogs? We're not talking about a puppy farmer, a back yard breeder or a dog fighter, nor are we talking about a banned breed , a cross or a non KC recognised breed. So I don't think it is fair to speculate. Imagine the breed instead had been Rottweiler, or Dobermann, or GSD or any more common guarding type breed -the sad fact is the comments would then not have been the same.

Lions roamed as far north as modern day france at one time. An interesting fact gleaned from a recent visit to paradise wildlife park lol

Well said goldmali. I agree, which is why i stated that i don't think the breed is the issue, but the real point is appropriate care and boarding of dogs in the absence of their owners. I guess this is also the point the judge was trying to make by leaving the lodger out of the equation.

>Wasn't aware there were lions in Turkey though, even mountain lions.

The Asiatic lion only disappeared from Turkey in the late 19th Century.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asiatic_Lion

I'm not convinced that the problem that is being highlighted is with the breed of dog, but rather the problem is with the arrangements for care of the dogs which should be appropriate to their needs?

Absolutely, the breed is irrelevant it is down to human error and lack of care and understanding, this could so easily have been any other type of guarding breed or infact anything from a terrier pack upwards who believed themselves to be protecting their outer territory and allowed to act as a pack, rather than well socialised individually trained animals. How these dogs were trained or not most probably also needs looking into, but I guess as they have all been separated that will not be known, the breed alone should not be called for a ban on.

The poor, poor, woman and her poor dog, it should never have happened, I honestly don't know how you get over seeing your dog killed in that way.

The asiatic lion once roamed from around the Mediterranean including Turkey eastwards through to India, and although they are now extinct in Turkey I imagine the Anatolian's development would have been influenced by their existence.

I agree the problem was due to human error but - but - if you have a breed which can exert a huge bite pressure and needs to be highly socialised, you flaming well look after that dog as if your life depended on it. You understand the breed and you do NOT forget what you have.

Yes any dog can bite and kill but the average domestic dog exerts around 320 pounds of bite pressure. Some of the more exotic European type dogs can exert 600 pounds plus, this is the Kangol, Anatolian Karabash type. You have to socialise these dogs and my bet is that they saw the land around them as their territory and just went for it (as they are bred to do). The owner got what her breed was bred for basically - guarding.

Dogs of this size you cannot stop. You can stop GSds or even Rotties to an extent. Three larger dogs, you cannot, if they are attacking a human or a dog. Owners HAVE to realise that socialisation is the key before all of these breeds are banned and other dog breeds also suffer. I do worry about this a lot - WHY are people, even intelligent breed people, not educating themselves and not understanding what they have??

I have a BSD and I know what I have. Sensitive, reactive, can be guardy/barky etc. If I had an Anatolian you have a dog who is strongly built, strong natured, independent, natural guard, loyal, suspicious, and territorial plus being a bit of an independent thinker. Who is not really tolerant of other dogs.

I get so cross when I think that we are not ready as dog owners to own such dogs UNLESS we know them and accept them for what they are and do not take chances, as with any dog, but recognising their huge size can prevent real control unless highly socialised and trianed.

Behaviourist Jean Donaldson says that often first dogs are well socialised but second and third dogs are not - I suspect this happens a lot but so much more likely with big dogs on large areas to defend.... they are bred for this and they need a job to do, or they will create their own and do what they are bred to do.

If we are to have big breeds in this country we must stop saying how cute  they are, and start understanding their needs and genetic ability and behavioural traits!! and socialise/train/manage accordingly.
Lindsay
x