Still Searching for Owner of Dog Who Killed A Pomeranian

Still Searching for Owner of Dog Who Killed A Pomeranian
The man who's dog reportedly killed another at Montrose Dog beach. Do you know his identy. If so, email me, or contact the police. Note he has a "blue" pit-bull-type dog.

His picture has appeared in the media - still no absolute identification.

Reportedly, the man pictured here took his pit bull-type dog to Montrose Dog Beach (Mondog) on St. Patrick's Day. And his dog attacked and killed a Pomeranian, while several witnesses watched, including the dog's owner Audrey Fisher and her 12-year old daughter.

The pit-bull type dog's owner took no responsibility and reportedly made off, refusing to give his contact information.

I talked about this story, and pointed people to the photo (on my blog) when I was on Bill Moller's show on WGN Radio. As a result, I thought I had a lead, and communicated to the police. It is still to be determined whether or not this lead pans out, but the police have told me personally there are very interested. My blog (and the Mondog site) may be last hopes, since my colleagues in conventional media have pretty much let the story go at this point. I have not.

Note: This man has what's called a "blue" pit bull-type dog (a type you don't see everyday), and reportedly drove off in a grey or silver car.

If you have any information on who this man is, feel free to contact me (As I said, I am communicating with police) or contact the police directly. Your contact information may be anonymous.

Not being there when the dog attacked, I can't personally comment on what happened. Here's one account from the Mondog website:

"Pit Bull Kills and Owner Shows NO Remorse, Walks Away On Saturday March 17, 2012 we walked into the Montrose Dog Beach Gate with another family that had a couple of cute little Pomeranian's. My son and daughter were having a ball running back and forth with our little poodle for about ten minutes when I heard some shouting. I looked over and there was a Pit Bull acting aggressively towards the family with the Pomeranian's. To my horror, I then directly witnessed the Pit Bull calmly balance itself over the littlest one and clamped down on the belly and back. Then the Pit Bull violently shook the small dog until it was mortally wounded. The owners of the little dog were hysterical and after a short time grab up the dying pooch and left for the vet. I went over to the Pit Bull owner and asked for his name so we could have a contact number and he refused. He told me, "the other dog started it". He showed zero remorse and was walking around calmly chatting with others who were unaware of what had happened. It seemed obvious that this was "normal" behavior for his dog and him. He then slowly slipped away while 5-6 people on bikes and in cars tried to follow him to see if we could get a plate number. He was abusive then in his behavior and language to anyone who approach to talk to him about the killing. He shrewdly and aimlessly walked around for almost an hour in the park while the police were called 10-12 times and he got away. This dog is a killer and the owner (above) has zero remorse. This Pit Bull will kill again unless we stand up (edited). While the owner was walking around, we saw the Pit Bull lunge at other small dogs time and time again."

I am appalled that this sort of event rarely occurs, but does happen in dog friendly areas. I was among a group that helped to convince the park district that we need dog friendly areas here. Having said that, dog friendly areas are not for all dogs. Dogs who (for whatever reason) may become aggressive to other dogs should simply not be brought to these places - end of story.

If a dog acts aggressive - there are no dog police - it's up to all of us to "police" these places before things get out of hand. The hope is (and I've seen this work repeatedly) community pressure does matter. So, if everyone at the dog friendly area politely but clearly suggests the person with the aggressive dog go elsewhere, that usually happens.If not, you go - let the aggressive dog and irresponsible owner stay - while you protect your dog by leaving.

But there are problems with this - how do you if a dog is "playing hard" or being truly aggressive? A dog trainer or dog behavior consultant might know, but even experienced dog owners can't always tell. (More on this in a future blog). Meanwhile, I suggest it's better being safe than sorry.

Worse, some dogs are not aggressors - but still seem to always be picked on. Sometimes these dogs (which must offer signaling which suggests 'pick on me') might be seriously attacked by dogs who normally would never do that. These dogs should attend basic training classes to build confidence, but for now, don't belong in dog friendly areas any more than aggressive dogs.

Are some dogs more likely to attack? Well, according to dog friendly area rules, dogs must be spay/neutered. So, if people abide by the rules - there are no intact dogs. Sure, maybe some "breedism" is true. And larger dogs can do more harm than smaller ones. No matter, the fact is that any dog may be aggressive, regardless of breed or mix. Besides, the mix you might guess a dog to be might not always be what a dog truly is.

Overall, I am still very much a fan of dog friendly areas.Often it's about owners who are guilty of taking their dogs - and then catch up on their phone calls or read the paper. I like it best when the owners interact with their own dogs. The dog may be social but it really there will participate with you. No matter, if you don't watch what's happening, how can you possibly be aware of an aggressive dog?  Requiring owners to be aware of their own dogs is, in my opinion, very reasonable.

As I said, I was not there on St. Patrick's Day - but Fisher lost a family member, as did her 12-year old daughter, and also left with veterinary bills. That is a fact. Another fact is that this man didn't offer his contact information. The police are interested. I am grateful for their interest - but require your help to find this man.



Leave a comment
  • It's OK to be "breedist" on this issue; if the Pomeranian had been the aggressor it wouldn't have been able to kill another dog. An aggressive large breed is always going to present more of a problem, and owners have a responsibility to keep them in check. My brother was the owner of a gigantic German Shepherd who was like a big kitten, but he never let if off the leash with children other than his own son, because the dog was almost bigger than him and at the end of the day, it's an animal.

  • In reply to Expat in Chicago:

    Hey Expat- you're right on that owners have the responsibility to keep their dogs in check and, more importantly, know when they shouldn't be entering a dog park at all. Small dogs can be just as aggressive as big dogs and it is is a mistake to overlook this. The Pom may not be able to mortally wound a larger dog but aggressive behavior leads to more aggressive behavior and there is no place for that in dog parks. Please be care on the "breedist" thing as well. A term that would be more appropriate would be "behavior-ist", not the term to describe professionals working with animal behavior but rather qualifying a dog based on it's behavior only and not profiling based on breed, color, size etc.
    I do feel very badly for the dog that was attacked and for their it's family but to condone profiling based on breed only will cause more problems . It should always come down to the individual owners to know what their animals are capable of and, as Steve mentioned, to know when to keep their dogs out of potentially dangerous situations.

  • fb_avatar

    I do need to correct you one one point, there is no rule banning intact dogs from Chicago DFA's. I think you could safely say that when there is a serious aggressive incident at the Dog Beach, odd are there is an intact male involved whether they are the aggressor or not. The Park District has not been receptive to the idea of banning intact males.

    Whenever something like this happens there's a lot of talk about about who should and shouldn't bring their dogs to a dog park. Yes, if your dog isn't fully socialized you shouldn't bring it to the dog beach. But I think the problem is too many people don't fully realize what their dog is capable of until they prove it, and people like Audrey are left with the results.
    They ignore the signals, and poo-poo bad behavior because Fluffy is the best dog ever, and Fluffy deserves to be at the beach because I pay my taxes, etc. In recent years it seems that most of the really bad incidents involve people who are not regulars at the beach, and it's not rough play gone bad. It's fights over toys where a dog comes out of the blue and within a minute has attacked another dog for it's toy (or as a toy) while their shocked owners have no clue what to do, except to get the hell out of there.

  • I commend the Park District's decision to continue allowing intact males at the park. Steve hit on a great point saying that if bans are to be placed, they should be directed toward specific individuals based on their behavior, rather than breed - why should we ban based on reproductive status? Obviously, bitches in heat should not frequent DFA - but why would you ban any friendly dogs from a "dog friendly area?" It makes less than no sense.

    Also, there is data that neutered dogs are more likely to display aggression than intact dogs, regardless of the age at neutering:

    I am a trainer with an intact male adolescent Saint Bernard - he is well-managed, well-socialized, and well-trained. While I choose not to use "dog parks" for a wide variety of reasons, I resent the implication that we should not be allowed to use these areas - why am I, a well-educated, dog-savvy, and responsible handler, and my dog, a well-trained and well-behaved canine, not welcome because he is intact in a place which welcomes irresponsible dog owners and their poorly trained, managed, and socialized dogs?

    Good job, Park District!

  • Also, I do often see incidents between intact males and neutered males. In my experience, the neutered males are often the "instigators," not because they're "aggressive," necessarily, but because they have not been socialized to intact males, who probably smell quite different from their neutered counterparts. Intact male comes up to say, "hi!" and neutered male says, "whoa, you are different, and therefore, kind of scary." Dogs see the world as "safe" vs. "dangerous," these perceptions being influenced both by genetics and socialization history during critical developmental stages.

    I'd love to see more well-managed, friendly socialization opportunities between well-trained adult intact dogs and altered puppies and adolescents.

    Now that I think of it - why are we discussing reproductive status anyway? Do we have confirmation of intact vs. spayed/neuter on either of the dogs involved? Is it even relevant to the conversation, or is this a red herring to distract from the real issue - that pet owners need to be educated in identifying appropriate socialization opportunities, read canine body language, and be held accountable for their actions as pet owners?

    Because spay/neuter is so popular, it's rare for puppies, during critical socialization periods, to have the opportunity to rehearse healthy interactions with adult and adolescent intact dogs of both sexes. This certainly can and does create socialization problems in adulthood.

  • As often is the case - I agree with what professional dog trainer, Chris Dignan says.

    Still, what I was saying in the post is that there are some breed specific differences. Overall, I think it's safe to say terriers may have more attitude about other dogs than, well, say your average Whippet. Having said that, any dog, and breed or mix can be aggressive. Because of their size and strength, larger dogs may be more dangerous, and more so to much smaller dogs.

    It's dangerous to go down this path because it is a sweeping generalization, for starters.

    Also, we know that by looking at a dog that looks - let's face it - you're thinking pit bull mix - that doesn't mean the dog has any pit bull at all - no matter HOW obvious it seems. Morphology (what a dog looks like) doesn't always match up with genetics of what a dog truly is. So, that dog that look like a pittie, might - maybe - have some pit bull in her but from five generations back. At that point, for sure, morphology has little to do with temperament. But I am going down a road that matters little here....

    What we all agree on - this dude was irresponsible. FACTS: A dog died, a dog attacked and that owner disappeared. He should be at the VERY least held responsible for the veterinary bills. I also want to know that this dog has a DFA license and a city dog license. So do the police - we need your help.

    Nice to hear from you Mondog - I am grateful for all who keep DFA's as clean and safe as possible and your comments are very important.

    You are right - I looked it up...and made a call from another committee member from back in the day....we decided against forbidding in tact dogs mostly because 'how can you police that?' Do you turn the dogs upside down. We thought (and I agree) that's a bit much. Certainly, what you said, though, about most fights being in tact - years later and with experience - should be noted. I thank you for the correction.

    Please spread the post and photo far and wide if you agree that this dude needs to be found out....

    I suppose (though can't imagine) one of my dogs getting involved in a scuffle with another....I don't just run away. And if this dog is guilty of this attack, the reasonable concern is that this dog has done this before and might again if not caught. Please share and help us to find him.

  • fb_avatar

    This really comes down to irresponsible dog owners, who "think" they know dog behavior, but don't really have a clue, or those who just don't care!
    From all the accounts of this situation, the guy sounded like he was with no remorse.
    These are the people that make these parks a problem, and because they can't really be patrolled, the rude people tend to monopolize dog parks of late, and do little to police their dogs behavior.
    There are obviously good people there too, but they are at the mercy of those that break rules.
    Last time I was there, I might as well wore a referees jersey with all the "scuffles" that erupted.
    After this latest incident, I think the park should have a camera capturing the inside of the park, as well as outside.
    Could even have a working 24hr live cam, all paid for by local sponsors advertising for those that are shut-ins, and wish to enjoy the dogs playing at the beach.
    More eyes and ears, the better I say!

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Mike Ward:

    Well said Mike! I had a similar incident a couple weeks ago at the Grant Bark Park when a dog walker took zero responsibility for her clients dog's actions. Long story short, a chunk of my dog's ear was bitten off and the dog walker initially offered to help us. If she would have taken us to the vet that Maddux is covered by insurance it would have saved us a lot of money. That wasn't the case, she left to get her vehicle, but was gone for more than 30 minutes. About an hour later (after I took Maddux to the nearest pet hospital) I see the dog walker in her vehicle. She told me her boss said not to disclose any information about the dogs owner, or the dog walking company she works for. Luckily I saw her car in the neighborhood near the gym I workout at on State and 8th. This time I got down the correct license plate number. But I don't want to deal with courts, nor do I want to deal with the dog walking company. All I want to do is find the owner of this dog and for him or her to take responsibility. I certainly wouldn't want them to lose their dog, I just want them to step up for what has happened. Clearly, the folks that walk Astro are not cooperating very well since when I ran into the dog walker again this morning, she called her boss to yell at me and accuse me of harassment. This time I had my phone on me and called 911 as soon as I saw the walker. After I called the police to help me get more information on her, the walker's boss calls 911 on me for "harassment." Despite how unsympathetic this dog walker is, I have no intention on bothering her. It's awful to see owners being irresponsible, but it almost seems worse to me when a dog-walking company refuses to comply or walks away with no remorse. They should not work with animals if they cannot handle accidents like this professionally. Wish there were more people out there that would just do the right thing! So please, if you live in the south loop/printer's row area and have a dog named Astro( brindle fur, weighs approx 35-45 lbs) then please contact me I just want to handle this in a civil manner.

  • Agreed Mike - interesting idea about the cameras too!!!!

Leave a comment