Warning to all dog owners in Thailand after a recent pit bull attack and other serious incidents

[billsmart]

On 11/7/2022 at 2:09 PM, billd766 said:

Just where would you relocate all the millions of soi dogs to?

 

A different province perhaps or another village or temple, as long as they are not near your place? That is a typical selfish NIMBY attitude.

 

A sort of good, all the soi dogs have gone, they are now somebody else's problem. 

First of all, I'm sure there are not "millions" of "soi dogs" in Bangkok, and, the only ones who would have to be relocated would be those that are considered to be a nuisance.

I live on a mountain in Phetchabun Province and take in dogs that are abandoned on the mountain road which runs past my property. I live on about 24 rai surrounded by jungle. Right now, I have 12 dogs IMBY.

 

How many "soi" dogs do you have IYBY? 

[billd766]

3 hours ago, billsmart said:

First of all, I'm sure there are not "millions" of "soi dogs" in Bangkok, and, the only ones who would have to be relocated would be those that are considered to be a nuisance.

I live on a mountain in Phetchabun Province and take in dogs that are abandoned on the mountain road which runs past my property. I live on about 24 rai surrounded by jungle. Right now, I have 12 dogs IMBY.

 

How many "soi" dogs do you have IYBY? 

I was counting all of Thailand not just Bangkok as the soi dog problem is nationwide and not just Bangkok so where would YOU relocate them to?

 

Who would decide which, and how many dogs, would be considered a nuisance?

 

i have no dogs any more and at 78 I wouldn't be able to look after them, however since you asked, over the 18 years we have lived here we have had 3 generations of them, so around 15.

 

I had the last 2 put down as they became chicken and duck killers, which is not nice when we kept chickens and ducks as did our neighbours.

 

My neighbour had 3 dogs and a bitch. One dog was killed running into a scooter and the rider was taken to hospital. Of course NOBODY claimed ownership of the dog.

 

Now they have 2 dogs, 1 bitch and 3 puppies. The animals are fed and watered and left to wander freely anywhere. None have collars or tags, none are trained, all of them are shouted at when they bark or fight each other. They get little or no TLC.

 

What would you do about them?

 

 

[billsmart]

9 hours ago, billd766 said:

I was counting all of Thailand not just Bangkok as the soi dog problem is nationwide and not just Bangkok so where would YOU relocate them to?

 

Who would decide which, and how many dogs, would be considered a nuisance?

 

i have no dogs any more and at 78 I wouldn't be able to look after them, however since you asked, over the 18 years we have lived here we have had 3 generations of them, so around 15.

 

I had the last 2 put down as they became chicken and duck killers, which is not nice when we kept chickens and ducks as did our neighbours.

 

My neighbour had 3 dogs and a bitch. One dog was killed running into a scooter and the rider was taken to hospital. Of course NOBODY claimed ownership of the dog.

 

Now they have 2 dogs, 1 bitch and 3 puppies. The animals are fed and watered and left to wander freely anywhere. None have collars or tags, none are trained, all of them are shouted at when they bark or fight each other. They get little or no TLC.

 

What would you do about them?

 

 

billd76, First of all, thanks for your detailed and respectful response.  I will respond below in the same order as your comment above...

 

I mainly see on AseanNow complaints about "soi dogs" in Bangkok and the surrounding suburbs. There are also a few now and then from other large cities. I don't see any from smaller towns, although I'm sure there are stray dogs all over Thailand. The issue here, IMO, is "soi dogs," or stray dogs who are considered, primarily, a danger, and secondarily, a nuisance. As I stated many times before, the only solution I know of that is acceptable to me is to relocate them to areas in which they will not be considered either. The best solution is to find them homes with owners who will care for them. Another solution is to send them to facilities that will care for them. The last solution would be to relocate them to areas that do not consider them a nuisance. Culling them is not a solution I would accept.

 

I would expect a government agency to decide on what to do and then do it.

 

I am 76, so I guess I have two more years in which I will have sympathy for these dogs. After that, I guess that sympathy just disappears.

 

i would also "put down" any of my dogs who constantly fought with other dogs or killed livestock. When I discover a dog like this, I first try to discpline them to rid them of these tendencies. So far, over about 20 years, that has worked. I've not had to "put down" any dogs because of issues like this.

 

Over the years, a few of my dogs have been killed by cars, or so badly injured that I did have to put them down. I have seen many instances of drivers actually running over dogs on purpose. ????

 

My dogs have no collars or tags (although they all have been vaccinated for rabies) and wander anywhere they want. Although my property is large (24 rai) and is surrounded by jungle. I do have few neighbors, and they all have dogs that also are free to wander where they will. That's not a problem for me or them.

 

I expect the government to have an agency to deal with "soi dogs" in any areas that consider them a problem. What I don't accept is that it is the right of individual local property owners to kill any dogs they consider a nuisance.

 

So, my ultimate solution is relocation. Either relocation of the "soi dogs" or those that consider them a nuisance.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[seedy]

48 minutes ago, billsmart said:

So, my ultimate solution is relocation. Either relocation of the "soi dogs" or those that consider them a nuisance.

Do you remember reading about the 4 or 5 year old girl who was mauled by stray dogs in Doi Saket ?

Do you know what was done to remedy that ? Nothing.

And I know because it happened about 2Km from where I sit now typing this in my garden.

Only 2 things wrong with your misguided, fantasy approach as quoted about.

1. No one will EVER do it

2. No place will EVER take them in

[seedy]

It NEVER ceases to amaze me that EVERY time a dog attack happens in LOS, people come out of the woodwork and make excuses for the DOG !

 

 

[Andre0720]

On 11/7/2022 at 8:38 AM, seajae said:

we have 3 dogs 1 was given to us(a bang kaew) and 2 that were dumped, one was only a day or so old when found, th other was around 6 months old. They stay in our property unless we walk them on leashes, they bark at everyone that comes anywhere near our property(outside of city) and are only out of their pen(8 mtrs x 4.5  mtrs) for a couple of hours morning and afternoon , more on weekends. We have wandering dogs from people that live near us and recently found a pup that was only a few weeks old crying at our gate, it came out of a palm oil property(stray), it is now with the MIL at our other house, trouble is many thais dont really care about their animals nor feed them properly. When we do anything at our land we get another young dog that lives near us running to come and play with us, it is loaded with ticks and always starving (we occassionally feed it), this is what most thai owned dogs look like unfortunately, there needs to be laws brought  in that dog owners have to take full responsibility for their animals and anyone found not doing so to face big fines but then no one would enforce it because that woud require people to actually do their jobs and work. 

"there needs to be laws brought  in that dog owners have to take full responsibility".

Nah.

Very obviously (to me anyway ????), what is needed is enough time for 3 or 4 generations of cross-breeding of Thais with foreigners, in the hope that the resulting new genetics would have widened to include some attitudes of 'responsibility'.

Nothing else has the slightest chance of success...

[JCauto]

On 11/7/2022 at 10:25 PM, FritsSikkink said:

Show me some facts then. What % of Pitbull's are aggressive compared to other breeds?

From my personal experience Yorkshire terriers are much more aggressive, the little shts can do too much damage though.

I'll show you facts! What percentage of gun owners are irresponsible? It's a very small amount! So what's the problem? Similar to irresponsible Yorkie owners. Small amount! I don't see the difference between owning a Pitbull and owning a Yorkie at all! It's the same as owning a gun and owning a water pistol.

[FritsSikkink]

3 hours ago, JCauto said:

I'll show you facts! What percentage of gun owners are irresponsible? It's a very small amount! So what's the problem? Similar to irresponsible Yorkie owners. Small amount! I don't see the difference between owning a Pitbull and owning a Yorkie at all! It's the same as owning a gun and owning a water pistol.

You need to learn the difference between facts and statements.

[JCauto]

31 minutes ago, FritsSikkink said:

You need to learn the difference between facts and statements.

Sorry Frits, I know you're Dutch and I persist in making posts that utilize humor and reasoning methods that are not understood by Dutchies with their tendency to take things at exact literal value and their, uh, inexperience with humor in general. 

 

Carry on and ignore me. 

 

[billsmart]

6 hours ago, seedy said:

Do you remember reading about the 4 or 5 year old girl who was mauled by stray dogs in Doi Saket ?

Do you know what was done to remedy that ? Nothing.

And I know because it happened about 2Km from where I sit now typing this in my garden.

Only 2 things wrong with your misguided, fantasy approach as quoted about.

1. No one will EVER do it

2. No place will EVER take them in

I do not remember hearing about the young girl who was mauled, however I don't doubt that it happened. 

 

There should have been a "remedy" to that if the dogs involved could be identified. And by this, I mean, the dogs involved should have been captured and euthanized, but I don't think this incident should justify an "open season" on all "soi dogs."

 

I disagree with your criticism of my approach to this problem.

1. As I said, it is not up to any ONE to do it. It should be up to the government, either the provincial or local government, but some governmental service to address this problem. I cautioned about leaving it up to individuals. That, I agree, will never work, and not addressing the problem will not work either.

2a. There are places that will take in stray dogs, if they are not vicious and are just considered a nuisance. Individuals (like me) will take them in, and there may be organizations that will provide homes for them. Also, as I said above, if there are not enough places that will take them in, the government responsible for addressing this problem will have to create and manage one.

2b. People who consider "soi dogs" nuisances or a danger, can move to places where they are not a problem. An example in an urban area would be a high-rise building with walled, private parking. In a rural area, stray dogs, IMO and my experience, are not seen as much of a problem.

[NativeBob]

On 11/7/2022 at 3:31 AM, Hans Johnson said:

Pit-Bulls are not the only breed. Rottweilers have the same reputation in Thailand for attacks. 

Please add AST. our neighbor owned 2 adult one and a pup. Often he let them freely run around our moo-ban, in front of kindergarten. Cute, right? Freaking scary <deleted> - the owner - is some military kingpin... Later adult AST killed their young pup. 

[billd766]

7 hours ago, billsmart said:

billd76, First of all, thanks for your detailed and respectful response.  I will respond below in the same order as your comment above...

 

I mainly see on AseanNow complaints about "soi dogs" in Bangkok and the surrounding suburbs. There are also a few now and then from other large cities. I don't see any from smaller towns, although I'm sure there are stray dogs all over Thailand. The issue here, IMO, is "soi dogs," or stray dogs who are considered, primarily, a danger, and secondarily, a nuisance. As I stated many times before, the only solution I know of that is acceptable to me is to relocate them to areas in which they will not be considered either. The best solution is to find them homes with owners who will care for them. Another solution is to send them to facilities that will care for them. The last solution would be to relocate them to areas that do not consider them a nuisance. Culling them is not a solution I would accept.

 

I would expect a government agency to decide on what to do and then do it.

 

I am 76, so I guess I have two more years in which I will have sympathy for these dogs. After that, I guess that sympathy just disappears.

 

i would also "put down" any of my dogs who constantly fought with other dogs or killed livestock. When I discover a dog like this, I first try to discpline them to rid them of these tendencies. So far, over about 20 years, that has worked. I've not had to "put down" any dogs because of issues like this.

 

Over the years, a few of my dogs have been killed by cars, or so badly injured that I did have to put them down. I have seen many instances of drivers actually running over dogs on purpose. ????

 

My dogs have no collars or tags (although they all have been vaccinated for rabies) and wander anywhere they want. Although my property is large (24 rai) and is surrounded by jungle. I do have few neighbors, and they all have dogs that also are free to wander where they will. That's not a problem for me or them.

 

I expect the government to have an agency to deal with "soi dogs" in any areas that consider them a problem. What I don't accept is that it is the right of individual local property owners to kill any dogs they consider a nuisance.

 

So, my ultimate solution is relocation. Either relocation of the "soi dogs" or those that consider them a nuisance.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The soi dog problem nationwide has no one solution that would be acceptable to all sides.

 

IMHO a lot can be traced back to the Thai version of Buddhism where due to 'karma' you are reborn as something better or worse than what you are in your existing life.

 

I personally don't believe that. I do believe however that most Thai dog owners buy dogs, or get them from a temple or the soi, without the slightest idea how to look after a dog and all that entails, and just push them out into the soi to scavenge food and water where they can, when they become a nuisance and become unwanted.

 

People in the west are taught differently and the majority of owners care for their dogs, registering them, getting them chipped etc. Having said that there is usually a surplus of perfectly healthy 'cuddly' animals dumped at the animal welfare centres around February and March when the excitement of the Xmas puppy has won off.

[billsmart]

17 hours ago, billd766 said:

The soi dog problem nationwide has no one solution that would be acceptable to all sides.

 

IMHO a lot can be traced back to the Thai version of Buddhism where due to 'karma' you are reborn as something better or worse than what you are in your existing life.

 

I personally don't believe that. I do believe however that most Thai dog owners buy dogs, or get them from a temple or the soi, without the slightest idea how to look after a dog and all that entails, and just push them out into the soi to scavenge food and water where they can, when they become a nuisance and become unwanted.

 

People in the west are taught differently and the majority of owners care for their dogs, registering them, getting them chipped etc. Having said that there is usually a surplus of perfectly healthy 'cuddly' animals dumped at the animal welfare centres around February and March when the excitement of the Xmas puppy has won off.

build766, I agree with everything you wrote above, for the most part. However, as you stated in your first line, there seems to be "no solution."  But, we are talking about a problem here in Thailand, so any solution would have to be one tailored for Thailand.

 

That could include educating people as to the responsibility they take on when getting a dog or any other animal as a pet. IMO, however, the most pressing part of the problem is addressing the two types of complaints associated with "soi dog." They are that some (a few) are dangerous, and some (most) are just considered to be nuisances. In the first case, I would accept the solution of capturing and euthanizing them. In the second case, I think capturing and relocation would be best. But I completely reject the idea that some have of killing all of them. That is not a solution that should be considered in a Buddhist society or any society that claims to be humane. 

[IvorBiggun2]

Simple solution. Any dog found off property not wearing a muzzle should be destroyed. If it's a Buddha thing not to kill animals then employ non Buddhists for the job. Plenty of folk wanting work.  

[billd766]

4 hours ago, billsmart said:

build766, I agree with everything you wrote above, for the most part. However, as you stated in your first line, there seems to be "no solution."  But, we are talking about a problem here in Thailand, so any solution would have to be one tailored for Thailand.

 

That could include educating people as to the responsibility they take on when getting a dog or any other animal as a pet. IMO, however, the most pressing part of the problem is addressing the two types of complaints associated with "soi dog." They are that some (a few) are dangerous, and some (most) are just considered to be nuisances. In the first case, I would accept the solution of capturing and euthanizing them. In the second case, I think capturing and relocation would be best. But I completely reject the idea that some have of killing all of them. That is not a solution that should be considered in a Buddhist society or any society that claims to be humane. 

The problem with educating or trying to educate people on this subject, is that they will only listen and be educated if they want to.

 

From what I see here in rural Thailand is that mostly they are not interested and don't care to listen.

[RobU]

On 11/7/2022 at 9:55 AM, FritsSikkink said:

Just like tigers, sharks, snakes, spiders, lions, hippo's, .......

Nuts

The animals you quote for comparison are wild animals, a natural part of the ecology, that do not generally mix with the human population. Pit Bulls are 'Domestic' (I use the word domestic with reservation) animals bred for violence by humans and should therefore be eliminated by humans, they are not a natural part of the ecology and could even do damage to the natural ecology if allowed to run wild. There is no comparison whatsoever between wild animals and pit bulls in the context of this discussion

[IvorBiggun2]

4 hours ago, RobU said:

humans and should therefore be eliminated by humans, they are not a natural part of the ecology and could even do damage to the natural ecology if allowed to run wild.

Example please or you're talking out of your bottom.

 

Why is your Pitbull so aggressive (4 reasons)

#1: Aggressive bloodline

#2: Bad owners

#3: Mental, emotional, or physical issues

#4: Other aggressive breeds labeled as pitbulls: 

[RobU]

20 minutes ago, IvorBiggun2 said:

Example please or you're talking out of your bottom.

 

Why is your Pitbull so aggressive (4 reasons)

#1: Aggressive bloodline

#2: Bad owners

#3: Mental, emotional, or physical issues

#4: Other aggressive breeds labeled as pitbulls: 

Interesting that you cherry picked my post which criticised your declaration that a purpose bred 'domestic' animal (Pit Bull) which mixes with humans is the same as natural wild animals which do not mix with humans. You have made it completely out of context. If you are going to respond to me quote the whole post don't cherry pick.

[jacko45k]

13 hours ago, RobU said:

Interesting that you cherry picked my post which criticised your declaration that a purpose bred 'domestic' animal (Pit Bull)

What purpose was that and can we do without it?

bred to bite and hold bulls, bears and other large animals around the face and head.

Maybe we can!

[IvorBiggun2]

13 hours ago, RobU said:

Interesting that you cherry picked my post

Not me. Why would I do that?

[actonion]

Bad owners, .......not Bad Dogs

[richard_smith237]

On 11/9/2022 at 9:42 AM, billsmart said:

I do not remember hearing about the young girl who was mauled, however I don't doubt that it happened. 

 

There should have been a "remedy" to that if the dogs involved could be identified. And by this, I mean, the dogs involved should have been captured and euthanized, but I don't think this incident should justify an "open season" on all "soi dogs."

 

I disagree with your criticism of my approach to this problem.

1. As I said, it is not up to any ONE to do it. It should be up to the government, either the provincial or local government, but some governmental service to address this problem. I cautioned about leaving it up to individuals. That, I agree, will never work, and not addressing the problem will not work either.

Agreed... Its a government issue, but no one in the government or a position of decision making power  on a national scale cares enough to do anything about the soi dog issue. 

Ultimately, this requires a solution involving people who are prepared to do the things most of us do not want to do.

 

On 11/9/2022 at 9:42 AM, billsmart said:

2a. There are places that will take in stray dogs, if they are not vicious and are just considered a nuisance. Individuals (like me) will take them in, and there may be organizations that will provide homes for them. Also, as I said above, if there are not enough places that will take them in, the government responsible for addressing this problem will have to create and manage one.

There are too many strays and not enough places to ’take them in’... Additionally, you are not taking these ’soi dogs in’... You are simply feeding them and allowing them to run around your area...

Can you feed 200 dogs ??... will your area be safe when they become territorial and aggressive because they can’t get enough food ?... 

 

 

On 11/9/2022 at 9:42 AM, billsmart said:

2b. People who consider "soi dogs" nuisances or a danger, can move to places where they are not a problem. An example in an urban area would be a high-rise building with walled, private parking. In a rural area, stray dogs, IMO and my experience, are not seen as much of a problem.

There are stray dogs in city centres, in the Soi’s and Sub-Soi’s....   we hear them barking and howling... 

The city is no place for a dog. 

What do people do outside of their ‘high walled private area’ ???... they still have to step over the stray laying outside the front of a 7-11.

 

Go to the beach...  In some area’s my child cannot play because there are aggressive stray dogs. 

 

I know you believe the dog has more of a right than humans to be wherever they are because you seem to believe that this is the dogs ’natural habitat’ and we are not part of nature.... but the reality is, these dogs are also a product of human intervention (breeding) and thus it is up to us to control their numbers so they don’t present a risk to our children. 

 

 

You have used how humanity has a detrimental impact nature to justify the rights of ’soi dogs’ but you have muddied the waters bringing in a separate issue...  

 

Dogs are here because we are, it is therefore our responsibility to control their existence. 

 

I think this is where you and I may differ - I’m prepared to go to extreme measures to protect children all over Thailand from any attack and would argue that ALL dogs wear an identifying collar. 

Any stray without a collar is removed (and euthanised - harsh, but this issue requires a harsh solution).

OR... Any stray dog without a collar is spayed (un realistic as its more expensive). 

And the owner of any dog with a collar found unrestrained on the streets faces a fine, or their dog is removed. 

 

A very harsh solution, but sometimes the softly softly approach does nothing to protect our children. 

 

 

[Orinoco]

Nice Doggey, 

One for the Proud Pit bull owners, of Asean Now.

Todays headline BBC News.

It's so cool to have one, boys and girls. 

 

Edited November 14, 2022 by Orinoco

[proton]

21 hours ago, IvorBiggun2 said:

Example please or you're talking out of your bottom.

 

Why is your Pitbull so aggressive (4 reasons)

#1: Aggressive bloodline

#2: Bad owners

#3: Mental, emotional, or physical issues

#4: Other aggressive breeds labeled as pitbulls: 

5. It's a PittBull ????

[Orinoco]

Kill them all  now.

Remove this nasty breed today.

From this planet, once and for all.

 

 

 

Edited November 14, 2022 by Orinoco

[Golden Triangle]

Yep, all Pitbull types & their inadequate owners should be put down, having a Pitbull is like someone with a very loud fast car, it makes up for the lack of adequacy in other departments.

[IvorBiggun2]

2 hours ago, Golden Triangle said:

inadequate

Who are you to call me 'inadequate'? Or anyone else come to that?

[Golden Triangle]

2 hours ago, IvorBiggun2 said:

Who are you to call me 'inadequate'? Or anyone else come to that?

Oooh hit a nerve somewhere, ????

[seedy]

21 hours ago, actonion said:

Bad owners, .......not Bad Dogs

Maybe it is the owners who should be dealt with then ?

Are you included in this demographic ?

[ChrisKC]

14 hours ago, IvorBiggun2 said:

Who are you to call me 'inadequate'? Or anyone else come to that?

He's wrong, Ivor. Your name alone is highly suggestive you are more than adequate!