update..Vicious Rottweiler banned from Weathersfield after attack on jogger

[SaranBear]

Originally Posted by jakesfostermom

Did you notice on their website that all the dogs are on CHAINS?

Just wondering ..... why they would put UNSPAYED in capital letters when advertising a pitt mix.... are they hoping that will attract adopters???

[Rubyhead]

I'll check out "dogs deserve better"
thanx SaranBear

[denverday]

Rottweiler euthanized following board vote

August 26, 2006
By Johanna Sorrentino Herald Staff
WEATHERSFIELD — The vicious Rottweiler who seriously injured a jogger on Little Ascutney Road in July was euthanized at the Springfield Humane Society on Friday.

The Weathersfield Select Board voted 4-1 Thursday night to euthanize the animal, owned by Douglas Metcalf.

Chairman Henry Cobb, the only "no" vote, was unavailable for comment Friday.

For most of the day Friday the dog remained in the cage at the Springfield shelter where he has lived for the past several weeks until a veterinarian from the Springfield Animal Hospital arrived to put him down around 5 p.m.

The dog was euthanized at the shelter because Town Constable Barry Newton, in charge of transporting the animals, submitted his resignation to the board following their vote on the dog.

Newton could not be reached for comment on Friday.

Select Board Vice-Chairman John Arrison said Newton cited monetary issues, not the dog incident, as the reason for his resignation.

Sue Skaskiw, executive director of the Vermont Volunteer Services for Animals in Bridgewater, said the board is wrong to have killed the 3-year-old dog named Bear

She said the town had asked her to facilitate an evaluation with a professional dog behaviorist and had told town officials earlier Thursday that the dog had been evaluated and a home found that met the board's criteria.

"We feel it's a breach of contract," she said, "I'm angry. The town invited us in and I feel that we were used."

She decided Friday, after consulting with an attorney, to send a bill to the town for the cost of the evaluator and trainer.

Tori Einglett, a professional dog behaviorist from Central Vermont Humane Society in Barre, evaluated the dog August 23 at the Springfield Humane Society at Skaskiw's request.

Einglett's report recommended an experienced owner committed to a strict training regiment who lives in a low traffic area without children under the age of 15.

"I do believe, based on our interaction with Bear, that he is a dog that gives a lot of warning and has a high bite threshold, making training easier than if he were hard to predict or randomly aggressive," Einglett wrote in her report.

The Select Board did not see a copy of her report, Skaskiw said, because the board never requested it.

Skaskiw said a couple who live on top of a mountain in Charlestown, N.H., approached her about adopting the dog. She said they have a fenced in backyard and two other Rottweilers.

"We did a two-hour home visit with a trainer on how to transition the dog, they called the vet and made an appointment to have Bear neutered," Skaskiw said.

Bear attacked Timothy Kehoe of Weathersfield as he was jogging by Metcalf's residence on Little Ascutney Road on July 8.

On August 3 the board declared the dog vicious and gave Metcalf until August 24 to find a suitable rescue organization or the dog would be put down.

The Select Board rejected Metcalf's suggestion that the dog live with a friend at a remote hunting camp because, Arrison said, the board wanted to turn the dog over to an organization that could rehabilitate Bear, not a private citizen.

The board received reports via e-mail from a Rottweiler breeder and a representative from the Northeast Rottweiler Rescue and Referral who also evaluated the dog recently. Arrison said both advised the dog be euthanized.

"The town has liability when two people with credibility tell us to euthanize an animal," he said. "The four of us were not willing to put this off any longer."

Arrison said Newton told the board Thursday he was present during all the evaluations and the people with negative reports would not handle the dog or take it out of its pen.

Skaskiw said Einglett's evaluation is more reliable because she had the other dogs in the shelter put outside to minimize distraction, walked Bear outside, put treats in his mouth and took treats out without incident.

Arrison said the board's original order was for Metcalf to find a suitable rescue organization and as of the deadline last night the board had nothing in writing from the Vermont Volunteer Services for Animals.

"If that was so critical to them they had the phone right next to them," Skaskiw said. "They knew ahead of time what they wanted done with this dog."
Rutland Herald: Rutland Vermont News & Information

[trackermom]

"Arrison said Newton told the board Thursday he was present during all the evaluations and the people with negative reports would not handle the dog or take it out of its pen."

Hmmm, I must have missed something.... I don't remember seeing Mr. Newton at my EVAL?? And i'm still wiping the spittle and slobber from my sunglasses from the dog lunging, snarling and growling in my face.

It is bleeding heart liberals like this that have no idea about dog behavior that ARE the ones ruining the breed.... I am sorry unless this dog was going to live with a behaviorist and NEVER interact with the public, Being PTS was much better for all involved....
The part the paper "forgot" to mention was that Tori also reccommended that if the type of housing she felt would be needed to facilite safe care for the dog and the communitiy could not be found, and she meet and speak with these people, that she also reccommended that the dog be PTS...

Originally Posted by denverday

Rottweiler euthanized following board vote

August 26, 2006
By Johanna Sorrentino Herald Staff
WEATHERSFIELD — The vicious Rottweiler who seriously injured a jogger on Little Ascutney Road in July was euthanized at the Springfield Humane Society on Friday.

The Weathersfield Select Board voted 4-1 Thursday night to euthanize the animal, owned by Douglas Metcalf.

Chairman Henry Cobb, the only "no" vote, was unavailable for comment Friday.

For most of the day Friday the dog remained in the cage at the Springfield shelter where he has lived for the past several weeks until a veterinarian from the Springfield Animal Hospital arrived to put him down around 5 p.m.

The dog was euthanized at the shelter because Town Constable Barry Newton, in charge of transporting the animals, submitted his resignation to the board following their vote on the dog.

Newton could not be reached for comment on Friday.

Select Board Vice-Chairman John Arrison said Newton cited monetary issues, not the dog incident, as the reason for his resignation.

Sue Skaskiw, executive director of the Vermont Volunteer Services for Animals in Bridgewater, said the board is wrong to have killed the 3-year-old dog named Bear

She said the town had asked her to facilitate an evaluation with a professional dog behaviorist and had told town officials earlier Thursday that the dog had been evaluated and a home found that met the board's criteria.

"We feel it's a breach of contract," she said, "I'm angry. The town invited us in and I feel that we were used."

She decided Friday, after consulting with an attorney, to send a bill to the town for the cost of the evaluator and trainer.

Tori Einglett, a professional dog behaviorist from Central Vermont Humane Society in Barre, evaluated the dog August 23 at the Springfield Humane Society at Skaskiw's request.

Einglett's report recommended an experienced owner committed to a strict training regiment who lives in a low traffic area without children under the age of 15.

"I do believe, based on our interaction with Bear, that he is a dog that gives a lot of warning and has a high bite threshold, making training easier than if he were hard to predict or randomly aggressive," Einglett wrote in her report.

The Select Board did not see a copy of her report, Skaskiw said, because the board never requested it.

Skaskiw said a couple who live on top of a mountain in Charlestown, N.H., approached her about adopting the dog. She said they have a fenced in backyard and two other Rottweilers.

"We did a two-hour home visit with a trainer on how to transition the dog, they called the vet and made an appointment to have Bear neutered," Skaskiw said.

Bear attacked Timothy Kehoe of Weathersfield as he was jogging by Metcalf's residence on Little Ascutney Road on July 8.

On August 3 the board declared the dog vicious and gave Metcalf until August 24 to find a suitable rescue organization or the dog would be put down.

The Select Board rejected Metcalf's suggestion that the dog live with a friend at a remote hunting camp because, Arrison said, the board wanted to turn the dog over to an organization that could rehabilitate Bear, not a private citizen.

The board received reports via e-mail from a Rottweiler breeder and a representative from the Northeast Rottweiler Rescue and Referral who also evaluated the dog recently. Arrison said both advised the dog be euthanized.

"The town has liability when two people with credibility tell us to euthanize an animal," he said. "The four of us were not willing to put this off any longer."

Arrison said Newton told the board Thursday he was present during all the evaluations and the people with negative reports would not handle the dog or take it out of its pen.

Skaskiw said Einglett's evaluation is more reliable because she had the other dogs in the shelter put outside to minimize distraction, walked Bear outside, put treats in his mouth and took treats out without incident.

Arrison said the board's original order was for Metcalf to find a suitable rescue organization and as of the deadline last night the board had nothing in writing from the Vermont Volunteer Services for Animals.

"If that was so critical to them they had the phone right next to them," Skaskiw said. "They knew ahead of time what they wanted done with this dog."
Rutland Herald: Rutland Vermont News & Information

[frontierrots]

Agreed. There were only 5 of us there for the eval (not counting the volunteer who came midway to hand out blankets) and one of them was a minor. NONE of the remaining adults was the Constable nor anyone from the town. Hey Cate, maybe they were INVISIBLE and drove INVISIBLE cars?????

[Gunsey'sMom]

OP:BostonRott

Rescue is NOT about saving every dog, it is about evaluating which dogs have solid and salvagable temperament. If you can't kill dogs, get the h=ll out of rescue

.

OP:Trackermom

It is bleeding heart liberals like this that have no idea about dog behavior that ARE the ones ruining the breed.... I am sorry unless this dog was going to live with a behaviorist and NEVER interact with the public, Being PTS was much better for all involved....
The part the paper "forgot" to mention was that Tori also reccommended that if the type of housing she felt would be needed to facilite safe care for the dog and the communitiy could not be found, and she meet and speak with these people, that she also reccommended that the dog be PTS...

Cannot agree more with you guys!!! These people seem to have forgotton there time would be better served rescuing animals who need rescuing, and putting animals out of there suffering, like BEAR, who were either poorly bred, or will robbed of a chance for a good life by people like Mr. Metcalf. Even if there were all the time in the world there are some dogs who cannot be saved. And rescuers DO NOT have all the time in the world!

If you read the last two articles posted, the stipulations for a placement for this dog are ridiculous, almost laughable, why not keep him in a supermax facility and feed him food through a slot? This dog doesn't desreve this. It is MORE HUMANE to put him to rest.

[trackermom]

Originally Posted by frontierrots

Agreed. There were only 5 of us there for the eval (not counting the volunteer who came midway to hand out blankets) and one of them was a minor. NONE of the remaining adults was the Constable nor anyone from the town. Hey Cate, maybe they were INVISIBLE and drove INVISIBLE cars?????

They must have been invisible.... Not even my 5yo saw them and she sees EVERYTHING!!!

[frontierrots]

go see http://www.timesargus.com/apps/pbcs....GroupID=350270

If you look at the related posts you'll see why I had to post

If it won't load for you go to Times-Argus and click on vent then news then scroll down for R for rottweiler

[Rubyhead]

I read your post on the TimesArgus site and I thought it was terrific. Brought back the whole point that this dog had been CHAINED. A few years ago a Lab here in MA had to be put down because it was vicious, and why? Because it lived on a chain. I see a lot of chained dogs in VT and the ones who are always on their chains are very scary, lunging and barking like crazy. The ones who are only sometimes on their chains are usually sleeping. At least in my area this seems to be the case.

And another thing, the woman said "...I don't like Rottweillers either...." why would anyone think that not liking a particular breed of makes it OK to kill it (eventhough she herself did not support this action she seemed to communicate it is a valid position).
Is there such a thing as 'breedist'?

This whole story haunts me...

Niki

[rottix2]

There was also an article in the Burlington, VT Free Press on August 27, 2006:

Dog put down after injuring jogger

Weathersfield – A Rottweiler named Bear who seriously injured a jogger earlier this summer was put down Friday after the Select Board voted 4-1 to have the dog euthanized.

Bear attacked Timothy Kehoe of Weathersfield as he was jogging by owner Douglas Metcalf’s residence on July 8.

On August 3, the board declared the dog vicious and gave Metcalf until Thursday to find a suitable rescue organization or the dog would be put down.

The Select Board rejected Metcalf’s suggestion that the dog live with a friend at a remote hunting camp. Select Board vice-chairman John Arrison said the board wanted to turn the dog over to an organization that could rehabilitate Bear, not a private citizen.

The board acted after receiving reports via e-mail from a Rottweiler breeder and a representative from Northeast Rottweiler Rescue and Referral who evaluated the dog. Arrison said both advised the dog be euthanized.

“The town has liability when two people with credibility tell us to euthanize an animal,” he said. “The four of us were not willing to put this off any longer.”

Sue Skaskiw, executive director of the Vermont Volunteer Services for Animals in Bridgewater, said the board is wrong to have killed the 3-year-old dog.

She said town officials asked her to arrange to have the dog evaluated by a professional dog behaviorist. That behaviorist recommended the dog be placed with an experienced owner without young children who lives in an isolated area and could apply a strict training regimen, she said. Skaskiw said a home in New Hampshire was found for the dog that met those criteria.

“We feel it’s a breach of contract,” she said. “I’m angry. The town invited us in and I feel that we were used.”

The Select Board did not see a copy of her report because the board never requested it, she said.

Bear was euthanized by a veterinarian at the Springfield Animal Hospital, where he’s been kept for the past several weeks.

[AlphaLeader]

I don't get it... I know others have different views on dogs and their placement within the family... but if you don't have the room inside or a properly fenced area for them to be safe... why have one?

To me, they're family. Each having their own little quirks and personalities. Why have a dog just to keep it outside on a cable?

That just P*sses me off.

Poor dog was set up to die the day they cabled him and walked away.