Tiny, 3# Chihuahua designated 'dangerous dog'

http://www.cbc.ca/news/offbeat/story...dangerous.html

Was hoping to get thoughts/opinions on this whole debate.

In my opinion, a dog bite is a dog bite, regardless of the size of the dog!!! Just because a 3# dog can't do as much damage as a 50# dog does NOT negate the fact that the dog has bit someone! It's overwhelming in the clinic the number of small dogs we need to muzzle versus large dogs... I can count on one hand the number of large breed dogs we need to muzzle versus the countless number of small breed dogs... Just because one dog's bite won't do as much damage as another dog's bite shouldn't excuse the fact that the dog bit someone.

Now, I may not agree with everything put against the owners, ie the million dollar insurance policy is a bit harsh, but I do agree with the notion that the owners absolutely should take full responsibility for the dog biting someone!!! If that means muzzling a 3# dog... then so be it!

I do think the $1million insurance policy is a bit extreme, but muzzling her would not be a bad thing if she is going to be loose. People need to take responsibility. No dog, no matter the size, she be allowed to bite people. Sure her mouth is small, compared to a larger dog, but any bite that breaks the skin can be dangerous and lead to infection, or worse.

Someone on facebook just told me I was in the "wrong business" (as a vet tech) because of my viewpoint as stated above. LOL

I think the 1 million $ insurance policy and maybe even the muzzle is a bit outrageous. Despite the fact that the dog is 3 lbs, it should still be a concern, but come on, a $1 million insurance policy??? I HIGHLY doubt that dog is actually capable of killing a full grown adult. It does seem a bit extreme.

I think every dog bite should be taken seriously though, really. I work at a Dog Kennel and in May was bitten by a 10 pound Jack Russel. This dog is a known monster, but it was bad. I wound up having to be on Augmentin for 10 days and still have a nice size puncture thanks to "Casey":rolleyes:According to her owners, "she'd never do that!" My hand was SO swollen. But I couldn't picture putting the family through something that extreme. I do expect dog bites now and then and I don't think it's okay to just forget that a little dog is capable of biting.

This is when it first happened. She got both hands but this one was bad. The puncture wound scar will probably be there forever.

ETA: Didn't know the pic was that big, but this is a warning, it's not pretty!

Size really doesn't matter.

If that dog bites a child, it could do serious damage. I think someone in another thread referred to Chis as lap piranha...fitting description.

I see no real issue with the city's decision.

While large dogs can do more heavy damage, small dogs IME have REALLY SHARP TEETH. While they may not break bones, they can sure puncture skin!

Hey, everone loves their dog. Large or small. Anyone with experience with dogs knows that when they feel threatened, or they feel that their loved ones are threaten, they may become aggressive. Preriod?

I also forgot to mention that my husband was bit by a small dog when he was a child. The physical scars healed. The fear of dogs. That took years. He did not even tell me for quite some time. People with no fear of dogs may find that funny. I don't think that fear is ever funny. The point I am trying to make is simply this, everyones experience is differrent.

I agree that small dogs are more likely to bite, I'm a groomer, small dogs try to bite way more than big dogs. But I do think this is a bit on the ridiculous side, especially considering there was no medical report on the bite. I'm sorry but I would be pissed if somebody said my dog bit them but had no photos or medical report to prove it. I feel like that is necessary, especially to be declared a "dangerous dog." I think the million dollar insurance policy is beyond ridiculous. If the dog (any dog, any size of dog) inflicted some serious damage, okay, but but a bite that didn't even require medical attention? Require the dog be in a securely fenced yard or on a leash at all times, problem solved. Which I feel like EVERY dog owner should be required to do, I don't care if you have the friendliest dog on the planet, unless they have awesome recall skills and they will not leave your side or yard, EVER, don't allow them to be loose.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wolf_Q

I agree that small dogs are more likely to bite, I'm a groomer, small dogs try to bite way more than big dogs. But I do think this is a bit on the ridiculous side, especially considering there was no medical report on the bite. I'm sorry but I would be pissed if somebody said my dog bit them but had no photos or medical report to prove it. I feel like that is necessary, especially to be declared a "dangerous dog." I think the million dollar insurance policy is beyond ridiculous. If the dog (any dog, any size of dog) inflicted some serious damage, okay, but but a bite that didn't even require medical attention? Require the dog be in a securely fenced yard or on a leash at all times, problem solved. Which I feel like EVERY dog owner should be required to do, I don't care if you have the friendliest dog on the planet, unless they have awesome recall skills and they will not leave your side or yard, EVER, don't allow them to be loose.

---

I pretty much agree with this 100%.

It's hard for me not to comment on the "small dog bite" issue in a context outside of this article since my experiences are in-clinic, and this bite did not happen in a clinic situation, so it's easy for me to go off on a tangent that puts small breed dogs in a situation that is not similar to the one in this article.

All of the conditions put on the dog/owner are very standard across Canada when a dog is designated dangerous. I used to own a dog deemed dangerous and I had to do all of those things and then some! The warning signs on our gates still make me laugh. Beware of dog & Dangerous dog on premises signs, but you figure out which dog! At the time I had 24 dogs and the one who was considered dangerous wasn't the one who would be barking at the gate!

I'm curious as to who will sell the insurance policy. We got that condition waived as no insurance company would sell a policy specific to the dog. It's in our local bylaw, but the city sent us a letter waiving the requirement.

I agree that a bite is a bite and they all need to taken seriously regardless of the size of a dog. A tiny dog could still do significant damage to a baby/child, even if they couldn't to an adult.

My experience with Mac changed how I think about dangerous dogs and bites in general. In hindsight, I should have euthanized him immediately.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jessika

I pretty much agree with this 100%.

It's hard for me not to comment on the "small dog bite" issue in a context outside of this article since my experiences are in-clinic, and this bite did not happen in a clinic situation, so it's easy for me to go off on a tangent that puts small breed dogs in a situation that is not similar to the one in this article.

---

So do I. I also think that the couple and their legal rep should have been able to see the bite on the woman as well as a medical report.

On the other hand, if that dog had bitten someone prone to bleeding, the situation could be much worse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wolf_Q

I agree that small dogs are more likely to bite, I'm a groomer, small dogs try to bite way more than big dogs. But I do think this is a bit on the ridiculous side, especially considering there was no medical report on the bite. I'm sorry but I would be pissed if somebody said my dog bit them but had no photos or medical report to prove it. I feel like that is necessary, especially to be declared a "dangerous dog." I think the million dollar insurance policy is beyond ridiculous. If the dog (any dog, any size of dog) inflicted some serious damage, okay, but but a bite that didn't even require medical attention? Require the dog be in a securely fenced yard or on a leash at all times, problem solved. Which I feel like EVERY dog owner should be required to do, I don't care if you have the friendliest dog on the planet, unless they have awesome recall skills and they will not leave your side or yard, EVER, don't allow them to be loose.

---

I also agree with this 100%. I am also in the veterinary field and I can attest that smaller breed dogs bite way more often than any large(er) breeds of dogs.

One of my customers was bitten in the face by her own chihuahua, around this size, and required six stitches.

I'm glad the dangerous dog law is applied universally regardless of size/breed. Can you imagine the nightmare of trying to determine the consequences on an individual basis?