Biker attacked by LGD's...
Most of you know that I am an avid mountain biker. Therefore, this article has double meaning for me being both a dog lover and a biker.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-na-sheepdog-attack27-2009nov27,0,7742604.story?page=1
A quick summary: During a mountain biking race last summer, a woman came upon a herd of sheep grazing in open range land, protected by two LGD's. She subsequently screamed, starling the dogs and was attacked. The dogs were euthanized. After her recovery, she took the rancher (who owned the herd and the dogs) to court for criminal charges (civil charges could not be filed due to an exemption in Colorado law for LGD's). The biker and her husband pushed to get jail time for the rancher.
I found this article on a mountain biking forum, and was a bit outraged at the conversation. It seems that everyone is either picking on the owner of the dogs, or the biker. No one seems to understand that there was fault on both sides. The following is my reply to the post:
"There are definitely two sides to every story... In my opinion, both sides did something wrong.
First of all, if you are to be biking in an open range area (race or no race), you should know something of what to do in case of an encounter with a herd (be it sheep, buffalo, cattle, etc.). If you are unfamiliar with what to do, you should not be out there. The woman in this story was obviously not familiar with what to do when encountering a sheep herd or livestock guardian dogs. From what I could tell, she seemingly barreled up on the herd and startled the dogs by screaming.
Secondly, livestock guardian dogs should be able to make split second decisions (on their own) with the information available to them. These dogs SHOULD have the capability of determining whether or not a threat is really a threat and therefore act accordingly. From the information available to me, it seems these dogs did NOT have this capability and should have been removed from the job long before this incident (from the article, it says the owner had been charged previously with owning dangerous dogs).
So, now you have a woman biking in open range land who has no idea how to react to a herd or livestock guardian dogs. You also have two livestock guardian dogs that are incapable of using judgment. That is absolutely a recipe for a disaster that could have (and should have) been avoided.
(Just my $0.02)"
Now, most of you are not bikers, so I am curious to your thoughts on this matter. Do you feel that one party is more to blame than the other? What about the biker's drive to have the rancher do jail time?
I am also curious to know for those who live in areas that have open ranges, are there unwritten rules/regulations for encountering a herd? Have you ever, in your travels with your dogs, encountered a herd being protected by dogs?
http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-na-sheepdog-attack27-2009nov27,0,7742604.story?page=1
A quick summary: During a mountain biking race last summer, a woman came upon a herd of sheep grazing in open range land, protected by two LGD's. She subsequently screamed, starling the dogs and was attacked. The dogs were euthanized. After her recovery, she took the rancher (who owned the herd and the dogs) to court for criminal charges (civil charges could not be filed due to an exemption in Colorado law for LGD's). The biker and her husband pushed to get jail time for the rancher.
I found this article on a mountain biking forum, and was a bit outraged at the conversation. It seems that everyone is either picking on the owner of the dogs, or the biker. No one seems to understand that there was fault on both sides. The following is my reply to the post:
"There are definitely two sides to every story... In my opinion, both sides did something wrong.
First of all, if you are to be biking in an open range area (race or no race), you should know something of what to do in case of an encounter with a herd (be it sheep, buffalo, cattle, etc.). If you are unfamiliar with what to do, you should not be out there. The woman in this story was obviously not familiar with what to do when encountering a sheep herd or livestock guardian dogs. From what I could tell, she seemingly barreled up on the herd and startled the dogs by screaming.
Secondly, livestock guardian dogs should be able to make split second decisions (on their own) with the information available to them. These dogs SHOULD have the capability of determining whether or not a threat is really a threat and therefore act accordingly. From the information available to me, it seems these dogs did NOT have this capability and should have been removed from the job long before this incident (from the article, it says the owner had been charged previously with owning dangerous dogs).
So, now you have a woman biking in open range land who has no idea how to react to a herd or livestock guardian dogs. You also have two livestock guardian dogs that are incapable of using judgment. That is absolutely a recipe for a disaster that could have (and should have) been avoided.
(Just my $0.02)"
Now, most of you are not bikers, so I am curious to your thoughts on this matter. Do you feel that one party is more to blame than the other? What about the biker's drive to have the rancher do jail time?
I am also curious to know for those who live in areas that have open ranges, are there unwritten rules/regulations for encountering a herd? Have you ever, in your travels with your dogs, encountered a herd being protected by dogs?
Comments
The dogs were on quarantine and could never be let loose again so their owners requested euthanasia - it was not mandated.
The flock has beed granted access to the national forest land there for 30 years. This could have all been easily prevented if the rancher and shepherd had been updated of the race's schedule so that the dogs could be kept tethered.
I think that the biker didn't use good judgement continuing to bike alone after sunset. She had a snapped chain and a flat earlier in the day. The dogs were known to be tethered during the day. I would think that in that part of the country, bikers/hikers/skiiers should travel in pairs/groups and have direct stop or other deterrents with them.
Noone would get jail time if she had been mauled by wildlife.
This is the number one reason that ranchers avoid livestock protection dogs, regardless of how effective they are.
From the sound of it, it was an unfortunate confluence of innocent events. The rancher honestly seems to have a great perspective on everything. The attempts he's made in the past to avoid the types of conflict he got into. And his admission that there is no fool proof way to ensure a dog won't bite a human.
Even though both rancher and biker did something that could be cause for assigning blame, I don't think either was wrong per se. I do, however, think the biker has behaved completely inappropriately since the incident. I won't try to minimize what she has gone through as I'm sure it was a horrible ordeal. But since then, she has acted without compassion or understanding in the slightest. So while I don't "blame" her or the rancher for the incident itself, I do "blame" her for being a dult and being childishly vindictive after the fact.
I am not sure that either side is to blame, but I definitely think that both sides could have acted better to prevent this situation from happening in the first place. I am quite curious to hear from Brad, as I believe he is one of the only forum members who actively employs LGD's.
I am also curious as to why the rancher would continue to work to dogs who have shown in the past that they may not have the best judgment in the field.
So, if it is the case that neither of these dogs had shown bad judgment in the past, what would then cause a bad judgment call in this incident? Perhaps not being socialized around bikes? Or maybe the woman's screams caused them to judge her to be a wild cat?
How would one train an LGD to have good judgment even in a situation they have never faced?
"Robinson and his wife, Shari, were returning from a trip to the Midwest on July 9, 2008, when they swung by to check on the herd, being tended by a hired Peruvian shepherd. They were startled to find the area overrun with mountain bikers. Vail's recreation department had scheduled a bike race and never informed the herders.
The Robinsons figured their dogs wouldn't be a problem, though five days earlier one, Lucy, bit a jogger and was taken away by animal control. It was the first time, the couple said, any of their dogs behaved aggressively toward a person.
The Robinsons ordered the remaining two - Tiny , 9, and Pastor ,11 - tied up during daylight to avoid another incident. The race was set to conclude before sundown."
I know broken chains and flats are part of the sport, but I was pointing out the circumstances that led to the cyclist being far behind the rest of the race, and being on course alone after sunset.
My initial thought after reading the article was that the bike probably was enough to make the dogs concerned. I know from listening to my parents' stories of going on safari in Africa that the animals get socialized to the outline of people seated in the open-topped vehicles and may become aggressive if someone stands up in the vehicle. So the outline of a person on a bike may have been different enough to the dogs to set things in motion. Add to the that the fact that it was dusk when many predators are out looking for dinner. Plus a scream and I bet the dogs just got confused. Maybe Brad, if/when he has the time to read this thread and article will have a better sense of what may have happened.
I have LGD, Mountain Bike, and have been charged by dogs while hiking... so the story kinda hits all over the place for me. When Stacey posted it on Flock Guard I read it like 3 times before it was digested.
I can say, we have people ride by our home all the time on bikes and our dogs bark at them. If they got into our fence w/ a bike (or without) they would be attacked. So, I think it takes a LOT of socialization with something like a bike before and LGD is used to it. I mean, I bet I could ride a bike into our property and get a strange reaction from them as well.. and then someone else could ride in w/ a bike and be attacked. LGD see the world through a microscope.
Point is, you take that kind of animal, let them free-guard their flock in a national forest then have a disconnect between event planners and local ranchers/farmers and it is a recipe for this type of disaster.
As much as I LOVE LGD, and LOVE the idea of them working and doing what they are meant to be doing, the risk and liabilities in this country are just too high to deploy them in that capacity w/o using other measures too (like a fence or a full-time shepherd). Some of the ways the independent working breeds were deployed 100+ years ago could be viewed as insane now days.
Having said that, I have heard many argue that LGD should not be allowed to think on their own the way they were meant to, and that they should be under constant control and lack the drive to "figure stuff out", and I think that is a total disgrace to the breed type. There is an in-between, they can server a functional purpose and still be used similar to the way they where back in the day - take mine for example. They sit behind a pretty big fence, a fence that didn't stop the predators before we got our CO (but it does stop random mountain bikers from biking through our property)... now we very rarely see predators. So, clearly BIG L and Masha are doing there job (even behind a fence) but w/o the liability of them roaming free.
I guess a lot of ranchers see LGD as a cheap alternative to things like fencing, and I think that may be the largest point of failure in the use of these types of dogs in this country. JMO (I'm no expert when it comes to ranching tho)
----