Get rid of the dog. I know several people who are literally and figuratively scarred for life because of dog bites to the face. Provoked or not, a biting dog is a liability for the city. No double standard for the city vs. a private citizen dog owner!

david009- quote "no dog lunges at a person without any given significant warning signs unless of course they are a pitbull"
So after defending this GERMAN SHEPARD who has bitten more then once, you throw pit bulls under the bus just like that? I find it disgusting that just out of nowhere, pit bulls is even leaving your mouth.I find it even more disappointing that you'd go out of your way to make such a big deal about defending dogs/how to approach them, etc. but then have no problem knocking down pit bulls. Sadly enough, I had actually agreed with some of what you had said, and then I got to that comment. So drink your jack and coke and feel great that you're contradicting everything you say. Pit bulls are just as good as pets as a lab, yorkie or a G. Shepard. I am quite offended that just because there's an article in the paper about a dog attacking, pit bulls get thrown under the bus for no reason. Maybe before running your mouth to defend your previous comments, you should re-read this article and see that this story was about a German Shepard, not a pit bull!

Comparing a police k9 to your average pet is like comparing a Ferrari to a bicycle. I trained 17 police dogs for departments in Wisconsin and Michigan. This dog is unpredictable, thus making it dangerous, no amount of training is going to overcome this animals weekness. No police dog should have to be muzzled to be around people, there is no excuse for keeping this dog. We washed out several dogs during their training when they showed unsocial or unpredictable behavior. There is way too much risk not only to the public but also the handler to have a dog you can't trust or count on when needed. A good k9 can never be a spook biter, a good k9 is always confident in any situation and never shows fear or fearful aggression.

btw its dog bite prevention week, maybe you should read this http://dogs.about.com/od/caringfordogsan...

when did i say a dog should be chained and muzzled all the time . if your dog corners people in your yard your dog needs to be chained. just because your kids are out there and someone comes into your yard doesnt make them in danger. what your dog should do is bark to alert you someone is there. most people will then stop and wait for the owner before proceeding . your dog cant reason and tell the difference between an intruder , a friend , or even a child.

etown, you can go on and on about being a responsible pet owner, and though I agree you should be, I don't think we agree on what that is. I do not believe that being a responsible pet owner means you go get a dog, take it home, muzzle it and chain it up for the rest of its life. I find that to be abuse. To be responsible, you need to learn how the dog thinks, what it likes and doesn't like, and what situations may set it off. If my dog had an issue with anyone who walked in the house, I would then deal with that situation, but would not keep it chained all the time. When my dog is in her yard, she will play in her yard with my children. If someone enters my yard and she feels my kids are in danger, I want her to protect them. I will happily pay anything if I know my dog was protecting my child. If you don't want to have to worry about things like that, get a cat. Not too many issues with them, of course not real protective of the family either, but that is ok. At least they wouldn't have to be tied up all the time.

anyone who has any questions about how this whole thing was handle and why the town no longer wanted the dog here should get a copy of te edgerton reporter , turns out the chief blames the media for the dog being returned. filed a report , filed under dog incident classified as case closed. the dog wasnt kept at the pd last week but rather rode around with klubertanz in his squad. the city doesnt want the dog at pd but it can be out in publc? the had stitches in face arm and also had bite marks on the top of her head. balis claims she was no where near the chief s office when the dog bolted after her. now they claim they never said the dog had to be quarantined until a decsion was made. amazing amaziung amazing, part of the problem here is the citys pr person tell the truth from the beginning if you want to gain the trust of the people who live here

With the reputation the Chief and Balis have I'm surprised it has taken this long for Karma to bite back!

david if your dog cornered someone for walking around the corner of your house ,then your dog should be chained when outside. thats exactly the reason they made a law that make s you pay double in damages if your dog bites more then once because some people just dont get it. in the end if you dont protect your pet from their own behavior they will be the one that pays the price, well them and your pocket book.

I really doesn't matter if this dog is good or bad, right now anyone who is responsible for the City of Edgerton should vote to get a replacement. This dog is now a known liability and if it bites again, the city will probably get sued. Weather the dog bites a criminal or not will be irrelevant. There is a record of behavior which makes the dog a liability. At least if they get a replacement, then if the replacement dog bites someone, Edgerton will have a better chance of winning a lawsuit. Really this is a no-brainer. Any elected official has to act in the best interest of the city.

I am sorry to hear off the loss of your other dog.

I do agree that a dog biting and/or nipping should be taken seriously. I also believe that people, be it children or adults, should be taught how to behave around animals. My issue with Ms. Balis, like I said was she continued when the dog was growling. Most civilian dogs will do that as a warning. Most people would then stop. That was my issue. There has to be some responsibility used around the dog. Of course, I was unaware at that time that a K9 dog is trained to behave differently in that situation.
And had that dog bit my daughter for no reason, yes I would have pushed the issue. Kind of like my kids. If one hits the other for no reason, there will be a punishment. If there was a reason, it will be taken into consideration. Getting all the facts before passing judgment.
I guess I have to say that when the guy walked around the corner of my house with my daughter outside and my dog pinned him, I was lucky it wasn't someone like you who feels the dog was in the wrong. Thank God he understood my dog was protecting my daughter. Even though my dog did no harm to him.

and no i dont believe dogs are vicious animals , i have 2 now , and we just lost one last summer who was 17 years old. but im a responible owner , not a careless one. if you read my earlier post i had a dog bite someone , was given a ticket . later they past a law if they enter your house without your permission your not liable . so i and my insurance paid nothing. unfortunately my insurance company forced me to get rid of the dog. my other 3 have never biten even our older male started getting anxious later in life when people came over especailly small children the dog was put away for their safety and his well being. if i had a dog that bit someone because they startled them from that point forward that dog would be leashed or put away when other people were present . i was raised in a home with several hunting dog , a dog biting nipping was never taken lightly

no maybe your should of been the parent and had that done.

Well then, I guess you better get on the police department for not charging the owner of the dog for my daughter, right?

Etown, you are going to continue to believe that all dogs are vicious animals. There is really nothing that is going to cause you to think otherwise. I am always open to finding out I am wrong, when it makes sence. And I am sorry, but I will never concede that a dog is just some dumb vicious animal and us human's can do whatever we want. That it will always be the dog's fault. I don't believe that and I never will. Do you realize, as you look up rights of dog bit victim's there are roghts for dogs as well?

they only exceptions that i know of is if you were abusing the dog. and then that person would be charged.or if you enter someone s home without their permission , it states it right there in black and white. without notice , meaning you had no prior knowledge your dog would bite, nevertheless your liable for the injuries

And as with any law, there are exception. "except as provided in".

174.02. Owner's liability for damage caused by dog; penalties; court order to kill a dog

(1) Liability for injury. (a) Without notice. Subject to s. 895.045 and except as provided in s. 895.57(4), the owner of a dog is liable for the full amount of damages caused by the dog injuring or causing injury to a person, domestic animal or property. (b) After notice. Subject to s. 895.045 and except as provided in s. 895.57(4), the owner of a dog is liable for 2 times the full amount of damages caused by the dog injuring or causing injury to a person, domestic animal or property if the owner was notified or knew that the dog previously injured or caused injury to a person, domestic animal or property.

Wow etown, the police need to file a report and issue tickets if they feel the homeowner is at fault. Neither of which was done. Oh, and I will tell you that the homeowners insurance did not cut a deal with anyone. And even if they did, that has nothing to do with the legality of it. The insurance will do it just to avoid any type of court case. If you trip and fall on someone's stairs in their home, the homeowner's insurance will try to make a deal with the injured party. Has nothing to do with the legal end of it. Unless you think that the homeowner should have contrloed their stairs better.

The dog bite statutes of Wisconsin make a dog owner strictly liable for damages resulting from a bite or attack by the dog on another person, domestic animal or property. If the dog's owner knew that the dog previously caused injuries, the owner must pay double damages. The owner also faces a fine and other penalties. In addition to the statutory laws, Wisconsin holds dog owners, harborers and keepers liable for scienter and negligence. For more about these causes of action in general, see Legal Rights of Dog Bite Victims in the USA.

the law if to pretty cut and dry on this. and being to school for a paralegal you should also know then the homeowners insurance company probably cut a deal with the person that was biten,if your dog isnt under your control or leashed your liable.

Was not throwing the "victim" under the bus any more then you were throwing the K9 under the bus. I simply stated that without all the facts, it could have been the handler, the K9 or the "victims" fault. I can't help it if you couldn't read that. If you read further, you will see that once I had more facts on how a K9 works and is trained, I was willing to concede that point. Again, not my fault if you couldn't or didn't read.
Yes, my daughter can tell me it may not be the child's fault. However, I will tell you that having been to school for a paralegal, the law does not automatically blame the animal either. In fact, in the case of my daughter, the police department quarantined it for 10 days and then released it. The dog, nor the owner was held liable. The law allows for accidents and really does keep in mind that everything is not always as cut and dry as you would like to think.

maybe then if your daughter is in school for police, she can tell you it was not the childs fault by law the dog and the owner are at fault. you keep talking about getting all the facts , you missed my main point , when you were pointing the finger at balis did you have all the facts. you were pretty quick to throw her (the victim) under the bus.

Jeremy, I find you a worthy opponent as well. And yes we could argue the night away with a few beers and a campfire. Although I drink southern and coke. My husband drinks beer. We can most certainly agree to disagree, and no hard feelings. Thank you for the lively debate.

How many of you know or are friends with Ms. Balis and that is why you are so adamant about putting the dog down without having all the facts?

etown-as for my daughter being bit. It was clear that she scared the dog. The dog is not nor was not a vicious animal. Had never bit before and hasn't sence. As I said before, if you get scared, you will defend yourself. My only interest in this is that ALL facts were found out before the dog is condemned. When a human beats an animal, do we not find out all facts first? Or maybe, if a human beats an animal we can just get ride of them without getting all facts first.?
As for my parenting skills, well I have a daughter going to college for police: another one for medical(doctor or nurse) another one for computers. Another who has graduated and holds down a full time job. Plus my 9 year old. All of who have not been in trouble with the law and will show anyone of you the respect you deserve. Guess it isn't all that bad. Oh, and my daughter said the dog bit was her fault, not me. It is sad when she can be more mature and compassionate then the "adults" on this forum.

Talking monkey- go to google, type in 5 basic instincts of german shephard and you will find the web site I got the five basic instincts from. Not any type of manual as you seem to think. Trye looking before you start accusing. As for being the police chief, you couldn't pay me enough to be the chief of police in Edgerton.
The only thing I have always said is that all the facts need to be found out before everyone starts jumping to the blame of this K9 officer.

Send the dog back and don't let david009 have another one. I suspect that the insurance company told them that if they kept the dog, they were on their own.

david009 actually the edgerton police chief??
Oh, I certainly hope not! This poster joined the website specifically to comment on this subject and did so for a specific reason. Maybe he's the chief's son? That would make sense...or somebody close to the chief.
All in all, the chief of police had no buisness being the designated handler for this dog and probably used his clout to get the opportunity to be the chosen one.

Yep. It took like an hour to write that...lol

they voted last night to send the dog back

David009, the more you talk, the more my BS meter goes off. Your backstory of your history is questionable and your motivation for defending this mess is unclear. But when you add in the possibility that you are actually the chief of EPD and things begin to make some sense. Like, for instance, if I was trying to get public sway on a topic, I would use this forum. If I were trying to taint a jury pool, I would get it on the the internet in the form of a forum like this. If I were trying to create reasonable doubt of what happened in that squad room, I would use this forum for that, too. Add in how defensive you are, and you being Tom Klubertantz is very likely. Having experience would be a good reason to get another German Shepard. Does the training center ask if someone has experience with these dogs? You TALK like a cop, too.
"5 Basic Instincts of German Shepherd Dogs"? that was not copied and pasted from a website (grammatical errors). It was re-typed into the box. From a manual of some kind? The story about your daughter being bitten; does Tom have a daughter that was bitten before? If not, then this was a nice redirect.
I hope I have brought some reasonable doubt to the minds of posters on this site. If it turns out that this is true, then look what Edgerton has for a Chief of Police.

Copperguy; You are entirely correct, as a former handler myself, the dog is not at fault, this is a handling error, and an overall training/trainer issue. The Trainer needs to go back and train the Handler on orientation. I do see some socialization issues. Most policies and procedures do not allow the police dogs to just wander around off leash. It is not sound handling. The dog muzzle concerns me. Most Police Dogs do not have to be muzzled around people. That shows a socialization issue. My dog used to be able to run around a large group of children during a demonstration and just act like a dog. On command though he would bite without exception. He was trained to do as he was told. He was a 90 pound German Shepard that came from Europe, and was selection tested for Police Work. Part of the selection test is socialization. A dog that has to be muzzled around people in my opinion is not properly socialized. Larry Filo should be looking at this situation with extreme caution. He is the one that needs to stand behind this animal and ultimately that would need to replace it. I would muzzle my dog at the vet, because like most police dogs it had some dog aggression. That was for the safety of the other people's pets at the vet. As most people who own pets know that many people do not pay attention to other people's pets at the vet and let their's wander. You always want to prevent your dog from being placed into an unwarranted bite situation, like this one. Handler error is my first opinion, second thought is that the dog should be looked at to see if it is truly fit for police work.

David, I'll say this for you, you're a worthy opponent. I'll bet you and I could argue the night away with a few beers and a campfire:) No hard feelings, how about we just agree to disagree.

david009 - I'm saying that I believe the dog should have been able to know who was coming down the hall (i.e. recognize by smell) and sense that there wasn't any threat! But that was before copperguy explained the training process (i.e. dark hall being a key factor to prepare for the bad guy he's been trained to confront). I have no idea how the training process for these type of dogs go. They've apparently been trained (conditioned) to react to circumstances that police officers routinely find themselves in. Copperguy's explainations to how the training process goes changes everything on my previous opinion that the dog is a defect and that the dog should have been able to sense there was no danger. The dog has been specifically trained to go on heightened alert automatically because of the surroundings (dark hallway)and conditioned to attack under those circumstances. So knowing this, I now believe there is hope for the dog and that more training is very much needed. Quite possibly, the chief is not a good candidate to be the one to handle this dog! Some people just have a good sense of animals and are able to facilitate the bonding process better and some people either never get it or will always be substandard.

wow now we want to find out the facts , yesterday all you wanted to do was blame balis . it s clear that your only interest in this whole thing is the dog. you even stated when your daughter got bit she knew she was at fault. how sad that you would place a dog above a human. rare ever is it anyone s fault but the dog and the owner of the dog. if your dog is the type that nips then it s your responsibility to keep that dog under control . to put that responibility on a child is ridiculous. your suppose to be there to protect your child if your not going to do that then what does she need you for?

Well david009, does he stay or does he go? Yes or no.

My point made. You HAVE to be right. I never said that this dog should be put back into service if what he did was wrong, however I didn't say he should be automatically exchanged without knowing all the facts. Just because I do not agree with your assessment that we do not need to find out all the facts before jumping to any conclusions, in no way indicates that I would argue in favor of child abuse or spousal abuse. I am simply stating that all facts need to be found out first before jumping to conclusions and deciding this dogs fate. And therefor, I would be hard pressed to say you are right.

"david009
Again Jeremy, you can only make derogatory and/or personal attacks. You are adamant in the fact that you are right, and refuse to accept any other opinion. For that, I am sorry. I can't imagine how hard it must be to be right all the time."
>
>
I've made several legitimate points but you just fail to acknowledge them, I can't help that. And to your question as to whether it's hard being right all the time, all I can say is it's not hard being right in this case. To me, taking the position that returning this dog and risking the public's safety is a reasonable course of action is tantamount to trying to argue in favor of child abuse or spousal abuse, you can't do it. This is a matter of public safety. There are just some things that are wrong. I could care less where the dog goes from here, it just shouldn't be serving as an arm of a department that is supposed to be charged with maintaining public safety, that's all. With that, I'm done debating this until after a decision has been reached by the city council.

Mooshoo- I would like to thank you for calling me a rock hound, although I have to admit that I am not sure when or how you got the idea that I specialize in geology or collect rocks and minerals(especially) gems stones as a hobby. But either way, I would have to say that both of those options would mean that I was a pretty intelligent individual, so thank you.

I forgot to add that david009 is a rock hound.

According to the story "City administrator Ramona Flanigan said Wisconsin Dells has forwarded the injury claim to the city of Edgerton. She said a claim also has been submitted for Balis’s injuries."
*
Anyone know how much those two claims amount to?
*
The medical claims will be peanuts compared to the legal settlement.
*
Should Ash make another unprovoked attack, the City would be defenseless and the potential of an exorbinant jury award would be certain.
*
Anybody who would argue that Ash should remain in service for the City of Edgerton is dumber than a box of rocks.

It doesn't matter to me one way or the other if the dog stays but all it takes is one more bite and they will have a massive lawsuit on their hands. Now with 2 prior bites under his collar the city will pay out the nose.

Even so, if the dog does not respect it's owner enough not to listen to any command or to act when not told to or have any reason to there is not a problem with the dog but with the training and the amount of training the dog has had with the handler. The handler should have never brought the dog into a social situation knowing that the dog and himself were not prepared to act social and be completely respectful. Even the K-9 Dogs when are on duty will not act unless told to or provoked. The handler knew this dog was not socially ready because of an earlier attack and was not trained propoerly because it did attack without command or being provoked. I'm not saying the dog doesn't have issues and needs more training but the story seems to focus on the negative of the dog and how bad the dog is but yet no one is blaming the handler who should have known better. He can apologize left and right but any good dog owner knows you do not put an unprepared dog into a situation that could potentially be dangerous. Muzzle and Leash or not this dog's owner should have known better and prevented this from happening.

Again Jeremy, you can only make derogatory and/or personal attacks. You are adamant in the fact that you are right, and refuse to accept any other opinion. For that, I am sorry. I can't imagine how hard it must be to be right all the time.

"Most of them I have seen are much more relaxed off-duty. Those will allow themselves to be approached and petted, and don't get aggressive when others are around. Still, if you watch them closely you will see the officer in them. Approach their handler on the sidewalk, and the dog will watch you intently. And, on-duty or off, if you physically assault the handler you will pay a monstrous price, command or not."
>
<
Ok, makes sense. Point out to me exactly where the "physical assault" took place? I believe the earlier story said the secretary was bringing the chief some paperwork, was the dog protecting him from a fatal paper cut? I'm sorry, animal or not this was an inappropriate response by the dog and I just don't see how the city can, in good concience, keep it in service given it's brief history of agression.
As for debating David any further, I'll leave that to the rest if you, I'm done. I'm reminded of a quote; "Never enter into an argument with an idiot as they will just drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience."

well i have to say if i get pulled over( and i hope i dont jinx myself) my first question is going to be are you copperguy from the gazettextra.com , if the answer is yes . im going to court and just going to plead guilty lol

lol, etwon! Don't be too harsh on david. I applaud him for being open to learning (which is more than we could say for hannah, many times). And, he is spot on with the argument that the dog is not to blame. In time, I hope others can uncerstand that, too. I try to stick to forums where I have training and/or experience to share.

Thanks for the kind words! You, too, david!

Thank you Copperguy for your patient explanation of how the K9 works off duty. As I have stated, I have not had the privilege to be around one of these teams, so I am interested in learning what I can. The only contact I have had has been watching them on TV. It is nice to get some information from someone who actually knows.

etown, I have been saying all along that this K9 acted the way he was expected to. So how exactly am I changing my opinion? Just because I am asking for more information and understand on how the K9 really works?

Most of them I have seen are much more relaxed off-duty. Those will allow themselves to be approached and petted, and don't get aggressive when others are around. Still, if you watch them closely you will see the officer in them. Approach their handler on the sidewalk, and the dog will watch you intently. And, on-duty or off, if you physically assault the handler you will pay a monstrous price, command or not.

These are generalities. Each dog is different, and each dog/handler team is different and has varying lengths of time together. Some dogs will allow "horseplay" with it's handler if the "vibes" it receives are not alrming. That is usually dependent on how long the two have been together.

copperguy a new hannah comes out of the woodwork everyday i swear lol, again your post are very knowledgeable, i commend you for knowing you information. as i ve said before you would be a great one in conversation , as long as it wasnt after you pulled me over lol ,. because i already know i would lose that argument

Coppertown, I understood that on duty they will not act as a normal civilian dog. I guess what I was asking is off duty, will they act like a normal civilian dog, or would they behave in much the same way off duty if they feel their handler is threatened as they would on duty? Or if they are off duty, does it then require the handler giving the order of "attack" before the K9 would react to any perceived danger?

etown, the only thing I may have changed my opinion about is whether Ms. Balis holds any blame. And frankly, I am always open to being proved wrong. If someone says something that makes sence, I can reconsider my belief. I was not privy to the way a K9 officer actually worked, so I will happily listen to someone who does know. And by the way, I am allowed to change my mind if I would like. I don't think there is any need for the personal attach.

david: See my 3:47 pm post. The handler and other people in the household will be seen as packmates. With them, the dog will very much behave as any house pet. On duty, however, the dog is trained to be both an instrument (as in odor detection), and a weapon, of sorts. Any time they are on duty, they are at a heightened state of alert and sensitivity. Even as simple an action as switching on the squad's emergency lights (without siren), causes the dog to become very animated and aggressive. So, if the handler gets in trouble and trips the automatic opener on the squad door, the dog will come out on the attack - even without a command from the handler.

how many times you going to change your opinion why dont u just stop typing and read.

Copperguy- am I correct then in the assumption that a K9 dog isn't supposed to act like normal civilian dogs? For the most part anyway? And I would like to thank you for getting on here and giving us the perspective from someone who has actually dealt with K9 officers. Up until now, I assumed they were pretty much the same as a civilian dog myself.

Bella: I have a different suspicion as to why Ash didn't release. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if the Chief simply gave the commands in English as opposed to the non-English commands that the dog may have been trained to understand, or perhaps gave the wrong commands altogether. Again, training and experience.

I've worked around K9s quite regularly. When I am on scene with one, I look directly to the dog's handler for my own protection. I happen to adore dogs of all walks of life, a fact which is well known by other officers. It pains me to have to keep my distance from the K9 officers, yet I know their dangers.

Of all the K9s I've seen, there is one particular Dane County animal that I do feel very at ease with. He has been with his handler for several years now, and in many respects resembles a typical house pet. Yet, I - and his handler - know that he is NOT a house pet. The handler and his immediate family are obviously seen as packmates by the dog, but I know that if someone ran up to the handler in a threatening manner, the dog would react ferociously.

I have had many hours of training with K9 handlers, as well as active incidents. So, yes, I do have significant experience with them.

These dogs are trained differently then a civilian dog. Maybe outside of duty, these dogs can act the same as a civilian dog, but while on duty, they are trained to act differently. This is why there is special training. The same as while on duty, a human officer may act different then a civilian. They have had different training. As far as the dog having respect for the handler. In the first article about this, it says that the trainer stated it can take up to 6 months for the K9 and handler to get that bond. To learn the actions of each other.
How long had these K9"s and handler's that you were around, been together? In this case, these two have only been together about 12 weeks. They still have a long way to go. And again, the handler has stated his mistake in this. He has taken responsibility.

all i can say i ve never been biten by a dog when someone tells me the dog bites.

Do you 2 own K-9 Dogs? If not, how do you know how these dogs aren't suppose to act like normal civilian dogs? A dog is a dog and unless you establish dominance and control any dog, K-9 or Civilian will never respect or listen to the handler. This is why the dog did not release when commanded to do so, it has no respect for Tom. I've been around 2 police K-9 Dogs and neither one of them was unsocial or skiddish, they were loving and affectionite even with total strangers unless otherwise instructed to do so by the handler.

Bella0220- the handler in this case has already taken his share of the responsibility in this. The thing is, the handler and the K9 are still fairly new to each other. I read in a prior article that the trainer said it can take up to 6 months for the K9 and the handler to fully understand each other. In this case, the K9 and the handler are still working on creating that bond. The handler should have kept him on his leash and has admitted to that.
It appears that the K9 officer was reacting to this situation the way he would be expected to. Unfortunately the bond between him and the handler hasn't been fully established yet. Maybe instead of punishment, there should be more training for these two?

Copperguy- I must you say that you make some very good points. K9 Officers can not be considered the same as, or handled the same as the civilian dog. Nor can you say that they can think and/or reason the same as the human officer. Very good point.

I don't condone what the dog did in anyway and hope Mrs. Bails and her family are compensated for her injuries. However, I do not believe that the dog should be put down nor do I agree with the whole list of crap about how certain breeds act a certain way. Any dog, Pit Bull, Rotweiler, German Shephard etc.. can be trained properly and most animals react to certain situations with the energy they get from their handlers. Any dog can be social if they realize who the boss is, obviously Tom has not done a very good job in showing this dog that it is not the leader, he is. (And no I do not believe in abuse of animals) Watching a dogs reaction to certain situations and then making the dog aware that you are the leader and you will provide instruction on how to handle the situation is how you handle and train a dog. If you're going to punish the dog then you have to punish the owner too, the dog is doing what the owner has trained it to do.

The thing is, you can't expect a K9 officer to follow a flowchart to decide how to act. You can't tech them, "Here's how you decide if someone is a threat or not." They are trained to respond to situations. When an officer is on duty, people don't just sneak up and say, "Boo!" for the fun of it. When someone approaches quietly and appears suddenly, that is a threat to the handler, if not to the K9 itself. It will react to that threat. It is trained how to react, which is to attack and subdue to aggressor. Again, you can't train a dog in the use of force continuum the way you do officers. You can't teach them, "Only bark if the bad guy isn't carrying a weapon, otherwise attack."

I don't know how else to say it. The Chief has accepted responsibility and acknowledged that he was at fault for not having the dog on a leash and/or muzzled. He has stated that the dog did what was expected. Had the dog been leashed under the handler's control, and muzzled, there would have been no bite.

The difference between Ash and the theoretical dog I spoke of is that Ash is trained to be much more sensitive, much more protective, and much more aggressive. That is why he must be leashed and controlled.

no they wouldnt if they broke into the home ,but if they just walked into a room or down hallway i m sure something would be done

oldestofthree: If a regular family in Edgerton had a dog that twice bit someone who broke into that family's home and physically attacked the residents, that dog would NOT be put down as a result of the bites - even if they were fatal.

oldestofthree- why can't we find out why Ash did what he did. What if he was acting the way he was expected to act? Should he still be put down?

If this dog was owned by a regular family in Edgerton~it would be put down by order of the EPD. Thats what should happen with Ash. How many people does it have to bite?

Copperguy, not to mention, to exchange the K9 for another one, wouldn't you have to start the whole training process over with the handler? Don't they have to become acquainted with the handler first? Which would require new training? It would seem to me that if this K9 is proven to have acted the way it would be expected to, it would be cheaper for the city and everyone to just provide more training for this K9 and his handler, wouldn't it?

etown: I understand those concerns. I doubt very much that the city's insurance carrier would agree to the dog staying if they were convinced that it is a danger. Keep in mind that replacing the dog will require the expense of another 12 weeks of training. I'm sure the city has to pay salary, meals, and lodging, even if the training itself is covered by warranty.

Objectively, I really think the best course of action is for some amount of remedial training, and very strict control of the dog until such time as it is fully integrated and comfortable with it's handler.

I am familiar with a civilian LE employee who volunteered for a building search training exercise with his department's K9 officer. Unfortunately, his protective equipment failed and he, too, was bitten. He required several stitches. In that case - as well as this one, I believe - the dog performed just as expected. The difference is that the incident I speak of was a training exercise, whereas the Edgerton one was simple negligence on the handler's part. That's not to say I'm hanging the Chief out to dry. It's merely an objective opinion, devoid of emotional or personal attachment.

Copperguy, if what you are saying is correct in regard to the k9 dog, then I stand corrected. I am going based on my knowledge of dogs in general. I am not aware, or was not aware, that a k9 dog will behave differently. Most dogs will allow you to back away from then(not turn your back on them). I was not aware that a k9 is trained to behave differently in that situation, though I would have to say it would make since.

Actually, backing away from a K9 officer can be just as dangerous as moving toward it. When in "fight," their job is to stop and detain a fleeing suspect until called off by the handler. In this case, that call-off either wasn't given properly or failed for some other reason.

Once the dog was aggressing, there was nothing Ms. Ballis could have done to stop the attack. Only the handler could do so. For that reason alone, there is no fault due Ms. Ballis.

To complicate matters, K9 officers are frequently trained using non-English commands. This helps the dog keep from getting confused by commands from other than it's handler. All of this takes a lot of practice to get right.

copperguy there is also talk that this dog bit someone after it bit at the police dept. the problem most from edgerton have with this is the way the city try to sugar coat the incident from the beginning. this has happened in other situation that has done nothing but cost the taxpayers more money. and heres the other issue right now they would consider replaces this dog , how long is this offer good for? no one knows. i personally dont think the dog should be put down, but maybe put back in training.why not take the replacement as long as the offer is on the table and play it safe. i wonder how people would feel if this was a child that was biten in the face and had a permanent disfigurement.

Malketbetter, the reason the k9 is used is to hopefully avoid the use of deadly force. If the dog is able to bring down a suspect without the use of deadly force, or the human officer being hurt, isn't that better? k9 need to be trained to protect their handler the same as human partners protect each other. The human officer and the k9 are partners. They have to depend on each other for their lives. I would hope that a k9 gets just as much training as the human would. And hopefully, without the use of deadly force to anyone involved.

Copperguy, I do not expect that most people would agree with me on my opinion on Ms. Balis. I am aware that this not a popular opinion. My thought is not whether she knew how to deal with this dog, my thought is that if you hear a dog growling, any dog, you stop and back away. I do not believe this dog growled and attacked instantaneously. I believe that the dog growled first as a warning. My question then is, why didn't she stop and back away? Why did she keep going?
Thank you for your answer to the treat. I have read that and to me it says that she gave the treat to the dog. Someone on here said she gave the treat to the chief. This article says she gave it the treat. I asked if they were considering the chief an "it". I was told that in another article about this, it said she gave the treat to the chief. I tried to find that article. I only found two and the first one made no mention of a treat, so I was asking where the article was that stated she gave the treat to the chief.
Again I would like to thank you for the respectful way you are able to disagree with me.

MakeItBetter: All K9 officers are trained to protect their handler. That's a crucial element of the partnership. Not all situations call for the use of deadly force (i.e. "handgun on the hip"). The dog and it's handler are a team, each protecting the other.

david: The info about the treat is in paragraph 7 of this article.

The part about the "darkened hallway" is an important consideration. K9s are often used to search buildings, such as when an open door is found at a commercial building (as but one example). In those instances, the building is quite frequently dark. I have participated in the training of dogs for this, and it is clear that they would be on more heightened alert when someone is in a darkened hallway or building. That's an association they make from their training.

Ultimately, neither the public nor sworn or civilian law enforcement employees can be expected to understand K9 officers the way their handlers do. That's where I disagree with you the most, david. Whether the dog was growling or not, there is no way I can ascribe any fault to Ms. Ballis.

The article says "Klubertanz claims the dog, which is trained to protect its handler,..." What is that about? No police dog should be trained to protect it's handler! That's what the handgun on the hip is for. There is no reason a narcotics or bomb sniffing dog should be taught to attack or defend. German Shepherds are protective enough of "their people" as a natural instinct as it is.

Oh, and Jeremy, trust me when I tell you that there is no one paying for my bills but you. Though, I could say the same for you. What are you doing right now????

Jeremy, I think that the personal attacks are a little excessive, but hey, whatever it takes for you to feel you have made your point. Um, it was not a darkened hallway my daughter came down, but one just the same. She scared the dog and she knew it? What is it you do when you get scared? I know that I will scream, and may even start swinging. Maybe you just curl up in a ball, I don't know. If you feel my parenting skills need to be questioned, that is up to you, but know that my daughter is on of the few kids today who will take responsibility for what she does. Not blame everyone else. If you have a problem with that, then I have no idea what to tell you.

"My daughter as the "victim" took responsibility for her action in the dog bit all on her own and she was only 11. Sad when an 11 year old can take responsibility for her actions, and adults are having fits when I suggest that they do the same."
>
>
What did your daughter do that she took responsibility for? Did she simply walk down a hallway in your home and your dog attacked her? Because if it's anything other than that then your alleged personal comparison has no relevance here. And if your daughter did just walk down a hallway and was attacked and she "took responsibility" then I'd say you need to spend more time learning about responsible parenting and less time on blogs blaming victims. Once again, this was a WORKPLACE! She wasn't parading around inside a dog pound. This is supposed to be a professional office where work gets done. Perhaps you just don't understand the concept of what happens in a workplace. Maybe your one of these folks who are just sitting on your duff waiting for the rest of us to pay your house payment and health insurance, I don't know. At any rate, it's not the obligation of the employees to have to tippy toe around the place because of a poorly trained animal. It's the obligation of the person or persons who placed the animal in the workplace to make sure it was fit to be there, period. I have not endorsed the idea of putting the dog down. However, I think it should be taken out of service and returned to the kennel and let it be their problem, not the city's, and certainly not the employees of the police department or the general public. It's an animal and people's safety comes before an animals "feelings" if you will.

Copperguy, I am glad that you were able to point out that you disagree with most of what I say, but I have to say thank you. It is nice that someone else feels the same way about the dog. As I said, what they ultimately do is up to them, and I don't really care, but it is nice that someone else feels that it should be investigated more before the dog gets condemned to death

I disagree with a lot of david's posts (and those of other posters, as well), but he is correct, to a point. Before I get to that, how has this become a "liberal" vs. "conservative" issue? That just totally escapes me!

And, let me say again, drawing black-and-white conclusions from anything that has been written in articles - or forums - is ill-conceived.

Here's a hypothetical situation for thought. There has been much discussion that the dog is unfit because it has bitten two people. Set aside the circumstances of those bites for the moment. Would those of you who claim the dog is unfit hold the same opinion if the two bites had occurred to suspects who were fighting the officers or threatening innocent bystanders?

Animals do not think or rationalize behavior the way humans do. A K9 officer will not wait for its handler's command to bite if it senses a threat to itself or it's handler. We don't know enough to determine why, exactly, Ash bit either of the two people. It SEEMS (caps for emphasis) that he attacked Ms. Ballis because he was startled and that created a "fight-or-flight" response. K9s are trained to fight, not fly.

It may be that Ash is not fit for service. A full investigation of both incidents is the only way to know for sure. The only thing we can say for certain is that he should not have been off-leash and probably should not have been inside the PD at this point in his orientation.

Assigning blame to either Ash or Ms. Ballis is inappropriate given what we know. Chief Klubertanz has admitted he erred, and that is the only CERTAIN fault we can find based on what we KNOW. He has accepted responsibility for that error, and the City will have to determine if discipline is to be pursued.

Wait for the full story before assigning any other fault.

I have no problems with critisism or people disagreeing with me. If you or garyprimer bothered to read any of my comments before his "having my number" statement, you would see that I already stated I don't even live in Edegerton, much less work there, so I obviously have no connection with that city, nor do I much care what they do. I do care about this dog. Whether it is kept in service or not, I don't care. I don't feel it is vicious nor requires being put down, which is what the majority of people are saying.

My daughter as the "victim" took responsibility for her action in the dog bit all on her own and she was only 11. Sad when an 11 year old can take responsibility for her actions, and adults are having fits when I suggest that they do the same.

"garyprimer, is the comment you made about having my number supposed to be threat?"
>
>
>
If you've read his previous posts he's making a reference to his belief that you are somehow connected to the effort to keep this dog in service, be that a connection to the police department or the city. But way to take a page out of the liberal handbook when it comes to facing criticism and crying that you've been threatened so you don't have to face further criticism for your statements.

I will tell you that my child has been bitten by a dog. One that we knew. She walked up behind it and startled it. The dog bit her. We took her to the hospital. I did not blame the dog, and neither did my daughter. She was smart enough to know she scared it and shouldn't have done that. People like you who feel that humans can do whatever we want and have no consideration for the way other creatures think, disgust me.

garyprimer, is the comment you made about having my number supposed to be threat?

"You have no idea what a danger is. People like you, with this liberal, "it is always someone else's fault" is the danger. Unfortunately there are more people like you. There are are few of us who expect the handler, the dog, and yes even the "victim" to take their share of responsibility. Even the place where the dog was trained said the dog was startled when she came down a darkened hallway. This does not make a dog a danger. I hope you never get that stupid around an animal."
>
>
Once again, show me where the victim has a share of the blame, other than making the decision to go to work that day and apparently do her job while at work? If this dog is so easily startled and so unreliable then in NEVER SHOULD HAVE BEEN IN THAT BUILDING TO BEGIN WITH, PERIOD! It's bitten two people in approximately a month, that absolutely makes it a danger. Bottom line, it's an animal and the victims are human. Though you may have a different view of things, as of now the humans are still a couple rungs up on the evolutionary chain and if it comes to one or the other going then the dog should go, no exceptions, or the city should just start signing some blank checks for the next victims to fill in.
People like you disgust me. I'm forced to wonder, if the dog had bitten a child, perhaps your child, instead of a police officer and an employee at a police department, would you feel differently? I think I know the answer to that question.

Get the feeling I do what? Get stupid around dogs? Well since I have been raised around them, own my own, and trained 5 German Sheppard's on a farm, and never been bitten by one, it appears not. But then, I know better then to startle them. Oh, and for the record, I have seen worse injuries given by a cat then what the picture in this article is showing having been inflicted by a "dangerous" animal. Don't ever pull a cats tail if these injuries are so terrible.

I kind of get the feeling that you do. ;-)

You have no idea what a danger is. People like you, with this liberal, "it is always someone else's fault" is the danger. Unfortunately there are more people like you. There are are few of us who expect the handler, the dog, and yes even the "victim" to take their share of responsibility. Even the place where the dog was trained said the dog was startled when she came down a darkened hallway. This does not make a dog a danger. I hope you never get that stupid around an animal.

Look, we got your number, you have been exposed. Why don't you just give it up? You keep spouting the same BS over and over like some obnoxious adolescent. The dog is a danger and apparently smarter than you.

etown, you made a statement that in an earlier article it stated that she gave the handler a treat to give the dog. What article was that in because I just tried to find it on the gazette sit here, and it only gave me two articles. This one and one other, that did not mention anything about any treat, at all. Not even a hint. Where did you find this article at???????

Hooters, I have a lot of dealing with animals of all types. I was raised around animals, have dogs, and cats of my own, along with critters. I can tell you, that if a dog feels there is a threat, it doesn't matter how well they can "smell" a person, or even if they know that person. My dog pinned a man up against his car, a man my dog knew, because my dog thought he was coming after my then 7 year old daughter. The man even stated that himself. A dog will protect their owner if they feel there is a threat to them.

I am not surprised the Public Safety Committee allowed the dog to stay. Those types of bodies often take a parochial view and side with the body (EPD) they are supposed to oversee. The Council, under advisement of its attorney will have a very different view of Ash's future with the EDP.

McGruff: Take a bite out of crime.

If John Q Public's dog inflicted serious injuries on two people within a month the authorities would be demanding it be put down.

"They got all kinds of things up there in Mount Pilot. Dog trainin', laundromats, car washes... I'm tellin' you, Andy, it's a whole different world up there."
>
Thanks a bunch, I just spit my diet coke all over my keyboard

david009 - So how much experience do you have with animals? Dogs don't have to "see" to know who is approaching. If they can smell dope a mile away, then they sure the hell can smell the scent of this woman that earlier gave him a treat. Dog was probably ticked off at her for making him choke@ Well, giving a muzzled dog something to eat or chew on wasn't exactly a brilliant move either. Same as riding a horse with a tie down into a lake and being suprised that it drowned because it couldn't get its head above water.

They got all kinds of things up there in Mount Pilot. Dog trainin', laundromats, car washes... I'm tellin' you, Andy, it's a whole different world up there.

Maybe the chief and the dog need to go to mount pilot for retraining. Unfortunately the dog will prove to be a very expensive experiment for the city.......

Referring to my last post: Seems.

david009, are you the cheif of the EPD? Cuz you're privy to privledged information.

David009 said "It's always about the money aint it." Well, aint that a revelation.

I don`t understand how this would be the "victim`s" fault. Yet bawling uncontrollably seems a bit odd for an adult as well. Of course it was a terrible thing to have happen, would scare the crap out of anyone. I just hope to not see some horrific suit over it. As far as the dog- fire him. He is not trained well enough to have his job!

garyprimer, I could not agree with you more....

David009, 37 posts today about the Edgerton dog incident, no previous posts. Too stupid to be part of a campaign by the PD to justify the dog's attacks, or is he?

A well trained dog does not attack until the command is given. This dog is not well trained and should be replaced. The police chief was in the wrong and should be disciplined and apparently he needs more training also. Maybe an injection of common sense on his part would help also. God forbid stupidity causes another unwarranted attack.

hard to back away when the dog lunges at you now isnt it . backing away will just get you knocked down faster. you do realize your defending a town that had a police officer shoot a dog on a chain because they were afraid of it. and if my memory serves me correctly i believe they shot another one in a fenced in backyard.

And everyone knows you back away from a growling dog.

You are assuming she gave the treat to the chief. The article says she gave it the treat earlier. To me(and I would think most people) it implies the dog. Unless you are now referring to people as "it". So it would be nice if you took the time to actually read the article and comprehend it.

it was in an article earlier , the chief had her give him a treat for the dog, everyone knows no one except the trainer are allowed to give treats to these dogs. he s her boss ... remember?

Read the article. It said the chief took the muzzle off to give the dog a treat Balis had given it earlier. Is the chief an it????

truly u really cant read. she gave the chief a treat to give to the dog.

And also the chief took responsibility and read the article it said Balis gave the dog a treat so now I am guessing by better judgment they both were wrong in doing this. Taking the muzzle off.

it would be nice if you actually took the time to read the article and then tried to comprehend it .or none of your points your trying to make will be taken seriously by anyone.

You Said the dog was already on her. So how then do you get your arms up if already on her.

well im not a rocket scientist david but im willing to bet if you seen a dog jumping at you , you could put your arms up to block it.

now finally you made a statement that is right , there is no responsibility, the city from the start has sugar coated the whole incident, right down to the severity of the injuries, what i dont understand is they are offering to replace this dog. so replace it , that offer may not be good later. this dog with a different trainer or more training may thrive somewhere else , if it remains here and this happens again what will its future be then?

If she had no idea what was happening until after the dog was on her how did she have time to raise her hands and protect her self?

I guess there is no responsibility in edgerton for any ones action lets just kill everything and everybody go hitler.

"Ok, my bad it doesnt say bark, but a dog cant bark with a muzzle on. Unless it is not tight enough the muzzle is suppose to keep a dog from barking and biting anyone. Either way who is stupid enough to go toward the dog if it is growling even if it has a muzzle on. The growl is a sign of aggression and is suppose to intimidate and warn you to stop. You dont keep walking toward the dog muzzle or no muzzle!!!!!!!!!"
>
>
>
A better question would be who would be stupid enough to bring a dog that already proved itself to be unreliable and overly agressive into the workplace and unleash it (literally and figuratively) on their employees? If this was a factory and the dog was a piece of machinery the machine would be shut down, period. But because it's a fuzzy wuzzy dog there are tree huggers like yourself who make all the excuses in the world for it. Its an OFFICE, people are expected to do WORK in that office and I'd hazard a guess that part of that work, particularly in a small department, involves walking past or into the Chief of Police's office. But all the employees should walk around on eggshells because of a mongrel dog? I have a better question, why does a dog that isn't supposed to be trained to bite except to protect the handler have to have a muzzle in the first place if it is so highly trained? And if it's supposed to be able to protect the handler in the event he is attacked then what good does having a muzzle on it do?

even if she had the class , which im sure she probably did because she followed everything else and tried to block the attack with her arms and not her hands. in this kind of attack there was nothing she could do , the dog growled and lunged. the best thing you can do is try to protect yourself from serious injury in this type of attack. by the time she knew what was happening the dog was on her. i see nothing wrong with anything she did. and seeing the pictures of the injuries makes me ill that they would even think of keeping this dog.

No dog just lunges at a person with out giving significant warning signs unless of course they are a pit bull and are train to tear the crap out of anything and everything!

Eye contact or not eye contact you do not remove your eyes from looking at the dog so it does not sneak up on you. So maybe not eye contact but you also dont turn your back, which is what I said in the first place. That is a sign of summation the dog with surly charge. And I am not attacking the victim. Like I said before the victim is just as much at fault as the dog and the officer who was training him. Read the comment would you? And stop spinning my words the way you please! I neither work for the police department or the city, I dont even live there, but when people are being stupid, I cant let that continue. And once again if the city has a class for this why was she not trained for it. She works with the police department and may (as proven by the incident) have to come into contact with the dogs. Who do you think is going to pay this law suit?

again read the story , it growled and lunged. so in a split second she was suppose to react? to a dog she thought had a muzzle on? why do you think drs offices and emergency rooms are required to report dog bites? because they take this very seriously , well everyone but the edgerton city council i guess

Ok, my bad it doesnt say bark, but a dog cant bark with a muzzle on. Unless it is not tight enough the muzzle is suppose to keep a dog from barking and biting anyone. Either way who is stupid enough to go toward the dog if it is growling even if it has a muzzle on. The growl is a sign of aggression and is suppose to intimidate and warn you to stop. You dont keep walking toward the dog muzzle or no muzzle!!!!!!!!!

david009
May 16, 2010 at 1:07 p.m.
Suggest removal When eye contact stops the dog will attack.

no this is what you said and this advice could get someone injured , bad advice is bad advice. admitting you gave bad advice is obviously a challenge for you. but personally attacking a victim seems to be right up your alley. and now that i look these are the only posts you have made , so do you work for the city of edgerton or the police department?

again r u changing the story where does it say the dog barked ? it s say s growled and yes my dog can bark and growl with a muzzle on. and i dont think i have an overly talented dog.

Would you guys read the posts first!!!!!! I said we were saying basically the same thing about the EYE CONTACT WITH A DOG!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Outside of that, I NEVER SAID WE WERE IN AGREEMENT WITH OUR OPINIONS. READ WHAT I WRITE BEFORE YOU RESPOND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

can a dog bark with its muzzle on... i think not. so she has to have hardly any brains to think the muzzle was on when the dog is barking...

lol garyprimer i agree , he and i couldnt be further away in our opinions lol

you know what david , again the story turns into blame the victim, how was she suppose to know the muzzle was removed? it was on earlier, so is she not suppose to do her job because the dog is in the building? the bottom line is even a private dog owner is responsible when their dog bites, the only time their not liable in wisconsin is if someone enters your home uninvited and without your permission. i can tell you this happened to us , and our dog bit them , but we still had to get rid of the dog after that the dog was never the same our insurance company would no longer cover the dog and i still got a 250.00 fine . for not controling the dog. did i want to get rid of the dog , NO but i knew the dog was a huge risk , and had someone else gotten biten and had permanent scars i would never forgiven myself either. so in my mind i did the right thing.

No it should not be the money it should be making sure everyone in the PD knows how to handle the situation. I agree the city should pay medical expenses and pay for any loss time she occurs. And a agreeable pain and suffering which the state of wisconsin does have i place.

Obviously not.

etown we were kinda on the same track guess I didn't explain good enough on eye contact. My bad.

it should be about the money when they think the dog is more important then the safety of the community or the employees of the pd. had they done the right thing from the start and said this is the second time for this dog , we do need to get another animal instead of keeping this one. im willing to bet that nothing would of come of this. but when they put a dog , above an employee, an employee with permanent , scars. i wouldnt blame her is she sued and i hope she wins the lottery with them.

IF the Edgerton police department has a class then did Ms Balis take the class. Can we sue for stupidity?

And we wonder why are city and state taxes are so high.

It's always about the money aint it.

Just looking at the comments made by Marc Balis, it sounds like a lawsuit will be in the future. Does anyone know if you can get a settlement from your employer and still keep your job with that employer?

What to Do Around an Aggressive Dog

This installment would not be complete if I didn’t tell you what to do when you encounter an aggressive dog. Statistics show that as many as 50% of children are bitten before the age of 12 years, so be sure to review this information with your kids. When confronted by an aggressive dog, your first instinct may be to run away. This is one of the worst things you can do. If you turn your back on the dog, he will be able to sneak up behind you, and if you run, he will assume you are prey and will try to tackle you. It is far better to back away from an aggressive dog. Shuffle your feet as you walk to lessen the chances that you will trip. Avoid direct eye contact; remember the dog sees this as a challenge. Keep your eyes on the dog to prevent a sneak attack, but do it from the corner of your eyes. If you have a purse, jacket, or something else with you, “feed” it to the dog if he tries to bite you. This may keep him occupied as you make your escape. If you have an umbrella, opening it in the dog’s face may scare him off. Many utility meter readers use a modified umbrella called the Bite Terminator® for this very reason.

If an aggressive dog knocks you down, curl into a ball and cover your ears with your hands. Curling up tightly will expose very few of your vital organs to the dog. He will mostly be able to bite your arms, legs, buttocks, and back, none of which contain life sustaining organs. In addition, curling into a ball protects your major arteries in the arms and legs, so chances are you will not bleed to death while awaiting help. Report all dog bites to the dog warden or health department so the proper follow-up can be done with the animal. The dog must be quarantined for 10 days after the bite, and examined on the 11th day for signs of rabies. In addition, most states have laws regarding vicious dogs. If you feel you were bitten because the dog’s owner did not properly obey the law, you may be able to file a criminal complaint.

Read more: http://www.doggies.com/articles/59-dog-b...

Read

straight out of the manual ........Assume a non-threatening position. Dogs will assume that you are poised to attack them if you face them head on and make eye contact. Standing sideways to the dog and keeping the dog in your peripheral vision instead of facing them and making eye contact, will signal to the dog that you are not a threat. If you can, fold your arms tightly to protect hands. If this cannot be effected without making sudden movements, keep your arms flat and still by your sides with clenched fists to protect fingers

Remember that when it happens to you. Then remember what I said.

david009
May 16, 2010 at 12:45 p.m.
Suggest removal

You know we are the ones who domesticated them in the first place before making sure we knew how to handle them. If a elephant in a circus goes on a rampage we blame the elephant, when really it was are fault in the first place. We take them out of their natural habitat and use them for our own pleasure. They have instincts that we need to remember. Like when a dog growls, who keeps walking toward that animal? It's like if you see a bear, you play dead not walk toward the animal. If a dog is growling you back away and keep eye contact. Dont keep walking toward it and dont turn your back.

Read again it says don't turn your back.

boy david maybe you need to attend the edgerton police department class on dog attacks. they are very specific and tell you never to make eye contact with a dog who is challenging you.

and u didnt say back away you said walk away . which implies your turning around and walking away.

When eye contact stops the dog will attack.

and your still wrong your not suppose to make eye contact with the dog that take that as a threat.

I said back away not turn away walk and keep eye contact so read again before typing.

Kids are not present they always do that when they are in the class room and they are not let out until the search is done standard procedure by law enforcement.

actually david your not as smart as you think , you never turn and walk away from a growling dog, they are more prone to attack that way. and if you actually read the story it says she heard the dog growl and then saw it lunged at her . it doesnt say it growled and she kept approaching and then it lunged.when a dog lunges at your chest there s not much you can do the weight of the dog alone can take you off your feet.

David009, my best guess is the school district will say no to bringing Ash into an environment with children present to do drug searches.

Keep digging cause no one takes responsibility for there own actions. Must be a democrat.

Didn't read what I said about the second offense in speeding obviously you can't read either.

Get rid of the dog = less stupidity in the police department= more stupidity in society. But the next time a child ends up dead cause of drugs in our community, because we could not find the drugs because no one wanted the dog. But we all know we as humans we can't sniff them out. Then what you gonna say then.

Keep digging david009, the hole is getting deeper. China is down there somewhere.

Speeding ticket $199, settlement in civil court for bite inflicted by dangerous dog $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.

mooshoo Balis was not held down and bit so why hold the dog down for her she should of just walked away and choose not to go any further.

Uh, david009, when the elephant goes on the rampage, do they put back in the ring for the next show???

Get ride of the dog = less stupidity in the police department.

You know we are the ones who domesticated them in the first place before making sure we knew how to handle them. If a elephant in a circus goes on a rampage we blame the elephant, when really it was are fault in the first place. We take them out of their natural habitat and use them for our own pleasure. They have instincts that we need to remember. Like when a dog growls, who keeps walking toward that animal? It's like if you see a bear, you play dead not walk toward the animal. If a dog is growling you back away and keep eye contact. Dont keep walking toward it and dont turn your back.

Thank you, my brainy friend. ;-)

Garyprimer, you rest your case?? What I am smarter enough to know how to deal with a growling dog??? Thank you, maybe some of the other people need some training on how to do the same. It is not my fault if the general population does not have enough brain power to figure out how to deal with a growling dog. Even my 9 year old knows how. I would be more then happy to teach you.

...we are no better than animals??? Should we tie Ash down and let Ms. Balis inflict bites until thirteen stitches are rendered and call it even? I suspect she has something different in mind.

Mooshoo speed once get caught speed twice asta la vista baby. Less stupidity in sociaty.

Edgerton should invoke the "bite me once, shame on you, bite me twice, asta la vista baby" rule.

I rest my case.

Ok, here is the deal. First of all, you need to be checking the five basic instincts of a German Shepard. This dog acted EXACTLY as it should have. People need to start realizing that we are no better then animals. Try looking at things from their view for once. Where was the brain power used when approaching a growling dog????

A woman is physically and emotionally scarred for life and some people still defend the dog and blame the woman. Take a look in the mirror. You are looking at a prime example of something that starts with a d and ends with bag. Just my humble opinion.

janesvillegirl72 and what breed was that dog and where were you when it happen. Sorry it happened but its like if a kid pulls on a cats tail it will claw the heck out of a person startle a dog it will more than likely going to defend its self.

hooters, just a comment from personal experience, a startled dog will bite with much force. My son was 2 years old when my mom's dog entered the pantry with him, upon moving the door and pushing (gently) the dogs backside the dog startled and bit my son in the face, his cheek was almost inside out and their were more bites on and around his eye, he spent 8 days in the hospital and now 15 years later he still has the scars even after a plastic surgeons input. All dogs are unpredictable and they will bite badly even if just startled. Scary thought

3. Self Preservation or Defense: Also called Reactive Aggression, this GSD instinct differs a lot from Prey Instinct and Fighting Drive Instinct. This GSD instinct (Reactive Aggression) helps the dog to develop inherent protective nature related to territoriality. This German Shepherd instinct denotes the degree of Sharpness, which is one of the most significant part of a well bred German Shepherd Dog character. Reactive Aggression Instinct or Sharpness is the catalyst of the two Critical Instincts, acting as the stimulating component of Booty Instinct and Active Aggression. Reactive Aggression Instinct of a well bred GSD also stimulates the Social Aggression Instinct.

4. Pack Instinct: This non-critical instinct is found in almost all the canine breed of the world. But in a well bred Alsatian Pack Instinct is noticed more prominently, compared to any other breed. The Pack Instinct is another most important German Shepherd Instinct that is highly significant for the Schutzhund trial, because this instinct increases the trainability of the dog. Right blend of Social Aggression and Pack Instinct makes the dog stay closer to his pack members. Viewing from the dog's perspective, the pack members includes all the dogs that he lives with, his handler, his trainer, his owner and all the other members of his family. This stimulates the dog's protective behavior.

5. Social Aggression: This non-critical German Shepherd Instinct also increases the degree of trainability -- especially for the Schutzhund protection services. Social Aggression Instinct makes the dog deliver "deep grumbling bark". Each of such barks stimulates the dog by generating power with him and he tends to express himself more dominantly. This is one of the most important determinants of a guard dog character.

Social Aggression is an exclusively a male instinct found in most canine breeds, but seen prominently in GSDs. Though this is a general desirable instinct for all the German Shepherd males, but this instinct remains dormant until the dog faces a threatening situation.

This states why the dog did what it did.

5 Basic Instincts of German Shepherd Dogs
Versatility of Alsatians is beyond question! A well bred German Shepherd Dog is an all round canine companion of his master, although it's true that not all shepherds are equally versatile. If bred properly a German Shepherd puppy will grow up with all the desirable and mandatory instincts that would make it a real royal dog and truly a protective companion of his owner.

Captain Max Von Stephenitz emphasized more on the working ability of the breed than the look. When it comes to the working ability (Schutzhund protection work) of the breed we need to know all about the 5 Basic Instincts of well bred German Shepherd Dogs. These five instincts are genetically inherited by a puppy from it's well bred dam and sire. Selective breeding is hence essential.

Wondering why I'm using the word "Well Bred" so frequently over and over again? Because breeding is that scientific art or artistic science (whatever way you look at it) that will give you a near to perfect dog, if not hundred percent perfect. So a good shepherd is the one that has a good parental lineage and have all or most of the the desirable features -- both structural and behavioral. These German Shepherd instincts are those behavioral aspects that cast a deep impact on the dog's character and behavior, making it a more useful companion. Two of these five basic German Shepherd instincts are known as Critical Instincts.

Here are the 5 Basic Instincts of a "Well Bred" Alsatian.

1. Booty Instinct: Also know as "Prey Instinct", this is one of the two Critical Instincts of a well bred Alsatian dog. This German Shepherd instinct makes the dogs chase moving objects like flies, moths, butterflies, mosquitoes, etc. and seize them. This is one of the most vital instincts for excellent Schutzhund protection work. The Booty/Prey Instinct is mandatory part of a shepherd's character, because it acts as the motivator of striking with speed and power. This critical instinct start to develop as the puppy reaches 6 months of age and eventually becomes prominent as it grows.

2. Fighting Drive: Fighting Drive is the second Critical Instinct of Alsatians. This German Shepherd Dog instinct is also called Active Aggression or Offensive Aggression, which is another very important instinct desirable for of the breed. This instinct helps the dog to deliver "rhythmic & explosive barks" during protection. Each of such rhythmic bark helps the dog to get positively stimulated, and the dog give high degree service of protection. This is why the Fighting Drive instinct ofGerman Shepherd Dog is important for the Schutzhund protection work.

Keep digging david009, the "dark hall made me do it" argument for keeping a dangerous dog is a non-starter.

Well said garyprimer.

The dog did not kill it attack based on the dogs training. And like I said why would you keep walking to the growling dog when its in a dark hallway. Why not walk away and and call to the office and address the concerns. So because she did not its the dogs fault.

The dog's job is not to kill people when it detects drugs. The police department's job is to serve and to protect, not to threaten citizens with deadly and vicious animals. That is a clear abuse of power.

Also if a dog is growling why would you keep walking towards the dog, also in a dark hallway the dog does not know who it is so yes he will attack and protect. And so many dogs will bit in training do to the fact it is called training for a reason. To train the dog from right and wrong, like in raising a kid and teaching them from right and wrong it does not come natural.

So the dog bites two people unprovoked, and yes, handing a leash to someone and walking down a "darkened hallway" are not provocation, and the gutless folks on the "safety" committee can't find the stones to recommend the dog be gone?
As for Ms. Flannigan, she may want to get her facts straight before she tries to whitewash the media. Looking at the picture it looks to be more than just the "minor scrapes and cuts" that she was purporting in her statements in Friday's story. Perhaps if the dog can't be at the police department it could stay at city hall right down the hall from Ms. Flannigan's office, bet she'd sing a different tune then.
Lastly, as for Ms. Egerstaffer's comment in the meeting reference wanting to know "the percentage this dog would do this again." Two things, 1) it's an animal you idiot, you can't calculate such things even for humans 2) Exactly what "percentage" is acceptable to you? How many more times do the employees need to be served up to be chew toys or does the public need to be put at risk to make it acceptable to you?
Unbelievable, how any of these people have or keep the positions they have in this town is beyond me. Maybe when the city's done building their $2 million taj ma-city hall the voters will actually turn out to vote some of these folks out of office.

Ash now has a history of unprovoked attacks. If the dog bites again in this manner, there will be serious hell to pay. The City should reconsider its position on the dog. It is now a risk management issue.

Did anyone occur to anyone that maybe the dog was doing his job. Being that it was a dark hallway and the dog is now in the protective stage of his training, or did anyone check her background in chance that there were drugs involved. Everyone is always quick to jump to blame. Typical society. And how many times has something like this happen and it ended up the person being at fault and not the dog.

You don't seem to understand people, the War On Drugs doesn't care about common sense, innocent lives or collateral damage; it cares about making busts and in doing so, justifying the trillion dollars that have been invested with no visible success over the last 40 years. Well, except to build more jails, bigger jails, bigger prisons, hire more police and yes, buy drug dogs. When the enforcement of the law becomes more dangerous than the effects of the breaking of the law it's time to re-evaluate; it's time to STOP THE WAR!!!

This dog needs to be put down and to keep such an animal that bites at will is wrong. If a normal citizens dog bit someone like this it would be gone. How many lives is EPD willing to risk and What if the next victim is an innocent child when they go into a house to use the dog in a search IMO the city is looking to be paying alot of law suits and better get some good insurance. Edgerton population 6000 has no need for a sniffer. Just my Opinion

Not a good move Edgerton PD. That dog is a liability. They are trained to bite when directed to not when they want to. I can just see it now!! This dog is a lawsuit waiting to happen.

You have been forwarned. The dog has already attacked. I am not a lawyer, but you may want to talk to one.

This is sheer stupidity. This animal has shown that it is aggressive and dangerous. The city is in enough trouble over this incident, but if the dog bites someone again, and it appears that if it gets the urge that it will, you will be open to an intolerable liability. I suspect that you may not have heard the last from the insurance company. This has the potential for million dollar liability and if you dodge the bullet on this one, it is fairly assured that you will not on the next. Use your head and get rid of the dog no matter how painful it may be.

My3Kids-
Check the stats, there is no increase in drug use today, only in mass incarceration and miltaristic operations of the police. The reason drug crimes spiked is the same as in the 1920's when the mob became rich and violent, prohibition! If you re-legalize marijuana then most of the cartels will fold just as the mob did, or find other interests.

so it wasnt just a nip , a bite on the arm and scratches. and it is the second time the dog bit someone. possibly there is another biting incident at his house. the city of edgerton has never been able to admit when there wrong, has to make you wonder when the tax payers are going to say enough is enough. this dog cannot possibly be so important that they wouldnt consider the offer of replacing it with another dog. that offer may not be available six months from now. how much money do they have to fork out before they see the light. a tore nostril is not an unfortunate accident but rather a permanent disfigurement. and i wonder if they will claim because she s an employee she cant get the 2 1/2 times the damages people get when a dog has already biten someone previously . thankfully this wasnt a child that got biten like this can you imagine the damage it would of done.

If "TRAINED" and Still bites, and not listening to commands, had to be pulled off the victim, this dog needs more training, not so much socialization, but handling training,, Ash had bitten someone else, Why was this dog even put into service?? I don't blame Tom (Klubertanz), This animal has issues, maybe a remedial training course is in order.. With the growing Drug problem in our country, dogs that have this training are a vital part of the Law Enforcement community.. so a replacement dog is in order or send this one back for more training... don't give up on the idea of having one,, Most dogs (of this type/training) are just as social and well mannered as a lapdog, this dog just may need that..... JMO

This story has nothing to do with the war on drugs but yet they still come out of the wood work ... they need a life, JMO

I think the War On Drugs is making a turn! It's about time the police face some of the same abuse they have treated million of innocent citizens with. I hope this lady sues the fur right off the city and puts an end to Edgerton's new weapon against it's citizens!!!

Bite me once, shame on you, bite me twice, get the check book ready.

I wondered too why the muzzle was removed. Being at the meeting last night I found out why when the chief explained his actions. He took the dog to his office on the other side of the building,and removed the muzzle as the dog was choking on the treat. Sounds like a responsible move. He was not parading the dog aroun the department to show him off. Responsiblity should be shared.

From the information in this article (yah, I know...probably not the whole story), I think the city should get a different dog. Animals are smarter than that and they have the ability to sense the intentions of people. That dog left the office when he heard her in the hall and he attacked. The chief also wasn't able to call the dog off...he had to pull the dog off her. Just wait until the dog bites somebody on a narcotics hunt. Someone out in the public. The dog will bite again. And those sound like some serious bites for just a "startled" dog. Either something in his temperment or wires got crossed during the training. Possibly the temperment of the dog was not suitable for the kind of training he went through. Just too risky.