Hot threads > [Soapbox]

but isn't there only anectdotal evidence available which would, or not, include those "chased" by cows with or without a dog?

it's all personal choice. my logic suggests that prey animals like cows aren't too fond of predator animals like dogs and run away from them otherwise herding-dogs wouldn't work. if it can't run away it is likely to get "nasty" like any animal. if it has babies who knows what goes through an animal's mind as well as and aprt from "protect baby" - just like humans do. hard wired instinct can probably be unpredictable. possibly even linked to having a particularly grumpy day, mental instability, not feeling too chipper or just being plain old argumentative.

> but isn't there only anectdotal evidence available which would, or not, include those "chased" by cows with or without a dog?

I don't know; I haven't researched all known cases of attacks by cattle, and, until someone does, it's all anecdotal...

> it's all personal choice. my logic suggests that prey animals like cows aren't too fond of predator animals like dogs

Sheep are prey animals.  They tend not to attack people, with or without dogs.  Well, on the other hand, I remember talking to an old shepherd who was training a dog, and him saying that the way to stop a dog biting sheep was to chain it to a ram for a while.  The ram soon butted some sense and respect into the dog...

Parky Again wrote (see)

stats grendel? read the papers.

hard facts about what? anectdotal reports suggest that a dog is involved in cow attacks.

as there is only anectdotal "eveidence" and no "facts" the same is true if any effort is made to support or contend that dogs may not prompt a cow attack. consequently both are "nonsensical statements" and are both valid and non-valid at the same time.

the only "facts" of recent note are this case the thread is about and the vet who was killed a not that long ago by cows. both cases involved dogs.

whatever stance or opinion you may have about such things is moot as you'll have to explain to the cows.

sheep tend not to attack people. well, quite right. sheep are small, cows aren't. big prey animals have a tendency to attack things they don't like. small prey animals tend to be able to run away rather quickly.

From the BBC:

While such attacks are rare, Health and Safety Executive figures show that 18 people - excluding Ms Crowsley - have been killed and 481 injured by cows in the past eight years.

There is no breakdown of incidents, nor can I find any on the HSE website.

So, we can't say with any certainty on way or the other.

Incidentally a local ROW goes through a field near here, and I have been pursued by the cows on some occasions, on others I am ignored.

I don't have a dog.

And the BLACKPOOL GAZETTE.

A local farmer where I live removed a fence adjacent to a track, meaning that cows can now go on the track. There was no advantage gained, as there is a fence on the other side of the track. The cows getting on the track does however, deter walkers.

From UTV

Thomas De Quincey, the 19th-century critic and essayist, once stated: "Cows are amongst the gentlest of breathing creatures." Many might disagree.

Farm worker Mike Scriven, for instance. He was left with severe bruising last week after being chased across a field by a 450kg cow. Scriven, 46, who was trapped under the animal's body for almost an hour, escaped only by gouging its eyes repeatedly.

The risk is even greater for farm workers whose injuries are recorded separately. Over the same period there were 23 fatal incidents involving farmers and their employees, another 300 that resulted in "major" harm and 277 in which the injury took more than three days to heal. Far more go unreported.

hse figures will be workplace incidents. these figures also don't provide breed.

you can't prove anything either way.

newspaper reports on people attacked (as in hurt/killed) by cows generally have a dog involved.

however there is much observation of the behviour of animals in the presence of a predator.

if someone wishes to ignore newspaper articles they are welcome to. if someone wishes to ignore well documented animal behaviour they are welcome to.

i think it is foolish to do so as animal behaviour would strongly suggest a link between the presence of a dog in an attack rather more than the presence of a dog not being a factor.

Parky Again wrote (see)

hse figures will be workplace incidents. these figures also don't provide breed.

you can't prove anything either way.

newspaper reports on people attacked (as in hurt/killed) by cows generally have a dog involved.

however there is much observation of the behviour of animals in the presence of a predator.

if someone wishes to ignore newspaper articles they are welcome to. if someone wishes to ignore well documented animal behaviour they are welcome to.

i think it is foolish to do so as animal behaviour would strongly suggest a link between the presence of a dog in an attack rather more than the presence of a dog not being a factor.

Grendel. wrote (see)

Parky Again wrote (see)

hse figures will be workplace incidents. these figures also don't provide breed.

you can't prove anything either way.

newspaper reports on people attacked (as in hurt/killed) by cows generally have a dog involved.

however there is much observation of the behviour of animals in the presence of a predator.

if someone wishes to ignore newspaper articles they are welcome to. if someone wishes to ignore well documented animal behaviour they are welcome to.

i think it is foolish to do so as animal behaviour would strongly suggest a link between the presence of a dog in an attack rather more than the presence of a dog not being a factor.

Exactly! So why say virtually all attacks on members of the public involve dogs

mick dray wrote (see)

'cos they do. Just google for info on cow attacks and 99% of the news and Police reports say a dog was involved.

Isn't that "99%" anecdotal Mick or is there hard evidence that it is the correct figure?

(Does anyone REALLY have the time to read every "googled" result to come up with that figure?)

Nope, can't be bothered.

I still don't have a dog.

Nasty . why will people not realise that their enjoyment must take 2nd place to a farmers livelihood. Animals in field equals no dogs. Cattle definately. Right of way, ? great but not at the expence of the farmer.

Stupid cow

it could have been 87.3% but i am prone to exaggeration

of course nobody has to read every googled result, i didn't.

My whole point though is that such matters are purely subjective and subject to the point of view looking for re-inforcement, and cannot be conclusively proved one way or the other.

Have you every bought a particular type of car and then suddenly noticed how many other exact same models including colour match are out there?

What you find is heavily influenced by what you expect to find, especially when there IS NO supportive evidence.

I could say that in 30 years in the emergency services I have NEVER been involved in a case where a walker was injured by cattle, suggesting that the issue is not as common as people might think. In that time however, I have personally dealt with several instances of farm workers being trampled/gorged by cattle.

That however proves absolutely nothing.

The crux of the matter is that walkers with or without dogs, must engage common sense, and dynamically risk assess the situation facing them, and decide accordingly.

Similarly, landowners must exercise the same common sense and not put people using PRoWs in danger by deliberately placing cattle in an enclosure containing them IF they have a viable alternative.

Common sense from BOTH sides is the key!