They're ways of helping to manage the situation which is going to be absolutely necessary, at least in the beginning, if she's going to get anywhere with the problem. I used a long line with Rupert as we weren't allowed to do anything to the fencing. Not that we could have afforded to even if we were allowed.

Firstly, BorderDawn, I would assume that you have had your dogs since pups, and were therefore able to socialise them as well as train them?
The dog I am talking about, is a rescue dog. Found bound up and beaten. His life before this could have been anything. He could have been a cat killer. He probably wasn’t socialised with cats or other animals. He could have been encouraged to chase cats. Its anyones guess.
Secondly
I do not think that is fair. Dogs are individuals, each have a personality, likes and dislikes and temperaments. Some are easier to train than others. Just because one person has some photos of her dogs cuddled up to a cat means everyone elses dogs should be able to? Ridiculous!
Also
Where in my posts have I said he wants to kill the cat? I have not implied that. His behaviour demonstrates that he is desperate to get to the cat, I have not assumed what he would do if he got to the cat. I, personally, just think he wants to chase it.

However, his mum does not want to risk her dog injuring the cat. Is this such a bad thing?! She admits that she has no control over him when hes charging up the garden, desperate to get into nextdoor. She has his welfare in mind too, while in the house, hes pacing by the backdoor, waiting for his next fix.

I think it is unfair of you guys to deem everything as black and white.

After all, some people on here have dogs with quirks, DA or other type of aggressive dogs. Should they get 'jumped' on for having dogs that way too??

Well after 7 and a half years of trying to stop it I know damn well Rupert will still go after a cat given the opportunity. And nope, I can't call him off as he's blind and deaf to anything but his prey once the chase has started. This is why he's kept on a long line.

And here we have the usual brigade that cats are evil, that the neighbour is in the wrong for daring to get a kitten and that dogs should be allowed to kill at will.

FFS. I don't let our dogs out of the back door without checking none of the neighbourhood moggies are in the garden first (or the escaped ferret from up the road) - takes 2 seconds, prevents a helluva lot of heartache (but requires some empathy with cat-owners I guess that one... I know how distraught I'd be if my own cat was attacked - not likely to happen since she doesn't go out as she'd struggle to climb away from anything).

Seems there's an element that do have some delight in turning their dogs out when a cat's wandered through the garden and letting nature take its course though. I just view it as common courtesy to take that 2 second precaution of checking before I let the dogs out - not that I want the neighbourhood cats in the garden, but that I respect that they're their much-loved animals and I'd like to make sure that they return home that evening in the same state they left the house in.

Oh and I see Pippam's staffy bashing again... delightful.

I'm glad someone else thinks so. This is all getting a bit confusing with the original offending dog being OUTSIDE it's own garden when it attacked a cat (then people posting to comment as if it was in its garden and the cat came in).

Now with this latest terrier who BROKE THROUGH a fence to get at the kitten. And people posting to comment as if it were the kitten who came into the dog's garden!

Both seem to me to be cases of the dog owner unable or unwilling to keep their dog restrained, or take sufficient precautions to make sure it does not get out. If a pup can break through a fence that fence is not sufficiently robust to keep the dog from getting out. If all that stops a dog that has previously been in trouble for getting out is a gate that can be left open by anyone coming in or even passing by - that too is not a sufficient safeguard.

Hell, I've had to go to a lot of trouble in the past to keep a giant tortoise from either getting out of a back gate or tunnelling under a neighbour's fence (they are great at digging) by burying wire to a good depth below the fence. And that wasn't because my tortoise was a danger to anything but runner beans and lettuces growing, it was because I did not want to LOSE IT!

I'd also be utterly livid if someone's dog broke through a fence to get at ANYTHING in my back garden - be it the cat, be it the dog, be it the barbecue. We had a neighbour who didn't secure his garden effectively when he got a dog and after the third or fourth trip down the street to return the ball of ginger woof to him - my patience was wearing incredibly thin.

If you're getting a dog - the onus is on you to make sure the garden's secure... not the people nextdoor, not the people three doors down (as we were).

I actually believe the fence on the right side of the garden is actually the neighbours responsibility?

I haven't seen a single person say anything even remotely resembling this Most of us do our best to ensure it DOESN'T happen.

I used to check my garden every single time before I let Rupert out. When he almost caught the neighbours cat it was because she decided to saunter through our garden while he was out there. She never made that mistake again.

I'd say a fence being secure as a fence and a fence being dog-proof are two different things. Our neighbours are fantastic but I'd never have dreamt of going to the one on the right (I forget which way round it is on our deeds and can't be bothered to check) and saying "we're going to get a dog- please make your fence stronger to stop a marauding mutt battering it down." The choice to get the dog was ours - why would our neighbours be responsible for suddenly upping the fence security?!

I am not sure where you pluck out the information upon which you base your posts, it certainly is not from posts on this thread.

I have read reasonable posts by reasonable people debating the pros and cons of the original issue and methods by which a similar situation could be avoided.

Perhaps if you spent less time manufacturing underhand motives for posters which are entirely baseless and more time on actually reading, digesting and considering the balanced views expressed your posts would be the same!