"Sacha" wrote in message
k...

Well now, let's see. We live way out in the sticks and have no street
lighting but no parrots, either. Or 'pikeys'. At the time I had those
particular dogs in that particular situation, I had several neighbours and
lived in a house fronting onto a lit main road. Luckily, I have never
seen
the reason to have a vicious dog on my premises to 'protect' other animals
or me.
Well obviously. You have never had lots of valuable parrots, nor opportune
pikeys (the fens has many pikey sites around) so you never had a 'need' to
protect your property. If you had got parrots and pikeys you might well have
had 'reason' to protect yourself.


All I can say is that it is a good job Kip never came to you as a pup.
You
would not have seen the need to keep him and would no doubt have had him
put
down.
Good job we aren't all the same. I could not abide a dozy bugger of a
dog
who would not protect me and mine.

I think it's a very good job that *most* people don't see the need to keep
vicious dogs in the manner you describe, yes. Not even people who keep
parrots - and yes, I do know someone who does parrot rescue, lives on a
main
road, has neighbours and does not keep vicious dogs.
And I know parot breeders with large aviary blocks. They need to live
fairly remote because of the noise nuisacne or large numbers of parrots
screaming at dawn every morning. All of them has several dogs. Most of them
have dogs which would bite intruders. When you are talking about tens of
thousands of pounds worth of parrots, you need to protect them. It is a
different case for someone who has a couple of parrots in their home which
is in a populated busy area. One of my friends has a single pair of parrots
which are worth around £5000 just for the one pair. In total his collection
is worth in the region of £80,000. You still don't see the need to have
large bold guard dogs??

I was making a point to someone who maintained it was ok for the kids
firstly to kick the ball over, and then to simply go and fetch it
without
asking permission. The garden owner might have a dog who hated kids, he
might also have had a shed with chemicals in or a greenhouse with
brittle
glass, or a fall in-able pond for the little darlings to drown
themselves
in.
The point I am making is that nobody should enter someone's property
unless
they have permission.

Then it's a shame you don't read properly. Because my post - which you
quoted - suggested that the OP give the children permission to come onto
his
property. I did NOT suggest going onto anyone's property without
permission. Not even yours.
You are correct then as I didn't read that the OP had told the children to
go in when they felt like it. I misunderstood and thought that the person
who posted was saying that kids didn't need to ask permission to go into
someone's garden.