XL Bully Owners Bite Back

XL Bully owners bite back All is not lost,  it seems, in the effort to prevent the XL Bully from being added to the proscribed dogs under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991.

The Licenceme Group (sic) has raised £150,000 and has already instigated a process which may end in judicial review and could, if successful, perhaps overturn breed-specific legislation altogether.

Licensing probably isn’t the answer to the problem that BSL is trying to address though. It will simply become a tax on dog ownership and irresponsible and criminal elements will evade it. Forgery of paperwork is comparatively easy and there will still be nowhere near enough resources to police the licensing.

We have a model of the problem already with the Pet Passport Scheme which is being roundly abused to allowed the illegal importation of thousands of street dogs as well as puppy farmed dogs, some under the legal age for leaving their mother. None of the national parliaments have done anything about this, so how would a dog licence be any different?

Whilst an overturn of this ineffective legislation would be welcome, a licensing scheme is not a solution to poor breeding and purchasing practices and until we address this, the next “XL Bully” type problem is just aorta d the corner.

Wales Takes The Lead


Wales Takes the lead
Although the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 is national legislation and is not devolved, Wales and Scotland are able to consider implementing measures to promote responsible dog ownership.

Accordingly, the Welsh Government has a web page with advice on responsible dog ownership and has called a summit comprising representatives from local government, the police, public health, third sector organisations and canine welfare and public safety campaigns.

This is so much better than the knee-jerk response implementing a ban on XL Bullies from the UK government. Such a response makes it easy to rabble rouse (surely with an eye to forthcoming elections) but does nothing to resolve a grave issue from recurring time and time again. BSL is also expensive and has resulted in the compulsory euthanasia of thousands of dogs that have never been a problem and were never going to be, not least those condemned under the vague designation of being a “pitbull”.

EFRA has released a report on Breed Specific Legislation recommending a focus on prevention through education and early intervention including training courses for dog owners who commit low to mid-level offences similar to the speed awareness courses for drivers.

As with the broken window theory, dealing with this at the lower levels of offences tackles the roots of the problem. It won’t prevent every incident but it may save a lot of dogs and owners from heartbreak.

Where Wales has taken a lead, we should follow.

Another Knee-jerk Reaction

Anther knee-jerk reaction The stupidity of the decision to ban the XL Bully knows no bounds. Yet again, the government ignore the weight of peer-reviewed science just as they did with Covid-19, and prioritise a populist response. Nothing to do with pending by-elections and a general election of course.

Once German Shepherds were demonised and the Staffie was the Nanny Dog and then they were demonised and became the media’s”devil dogs”. Now it is another bull breed derivative.

It seems the government is not prepared to learn the lessons from listing the so-called pit bull and we will have yet more perfectly fine dogs confined to leads and muzzles for no good reason and worse – owners will be obliged to neuter so that we will effectively be reducing the pool of dogs with good temperaments. More so-called expert witnesses will be polishing their callipers ready to measure those massive heads – how many millimetres over their limit does a bully have to be to be condemned even if it has done nothing?

There is a serious problem and that has led to so many injuries and fatalities this year but it is far more complex than sticking a type of dog on a list. Whether it’s a large dog confined to a council flat or a dog walker unable to cope with too many dogs, the problem lies with breeding, purchase and ownership.

This was a missed opportunity to improve the legislation regarding breeding and responsible ownership, a missed opportunity to support behaviourists and trainers who are trying to deal with the consequences and a missed opportunity to save lives.

XL bullies are already being dumped and now will probably be culled as, once the legislation is enacted, it will be illegal to exchange or sell them. Responsible owners will be demonised and, right now, I am thinking of the delightful XL Bully bitch that my puppy was romping with last week. She was well-trained and well cared for and, despite being three times the size and weight of my puppy had perfect play manners.

Rishi Sunak might like to consider that his own chosen breed, the Labrador is a restricted breed in Ukraine and they feature high on the list of dogs causing injury in the UK. Of course, the Labrador has excellent PR – puppies rolling around with lavatory paper, Guide Dogs; but anyone that has been on the receiving end of an aroused Labrador may have a different view, as might the person who like me, had a whale of a time playing with an XL Bully.

Shocking Shame


Electric kickback
At last legislation is due to come into force on February 1st, 2024 to ban shock collars in England.

However, there is a strong lobby that regards shock collars as the only way to prevent livestock worrying and members of the House of Lords who happily boast of using them on their companion dogs. It is 23 years since they were banned in Wales, a country with 11 million sheep and just 3.1 million people.

There is plenty of research that shows that severe punishment – and we are talking about electrocution after all – does not work and research that shows that shock collars cannot and do not deliver a reliable measured shock. It is illegal to electrocute children, why are dogs any different?

We cannot take the passing of this legislation for granted, Lobby your MP and write to DEFRA in support.

 

Shop Fitting

Shop Fitting It can be challenging shopping when one has a dog, especially if one lives alone. Dogs should never be left alone outside and many shops – and even shopping centres – ban dogs.

Often this is due to misunderstanding the law – dogs are only legally prohibited from food preparation areas. That said, it is frequently difficult to take dogs into banks, post offices and shops where well-behaved dogs should not be a problem.

Some people don’t like dogs; I don’t like children, but I still have to put up with them, and they are often exhibit far worse behaviour than my dog.

So good news, then that Dalton Park shopping centre in County Durham not only allows dogs but facilitates owners. Each entrance provides water, poo bags and dog waste bins and the centre provides canine first aid facilities. Dog-friendly shops display a sticker in their window and there happen to be 55 acres of parkland attached.

Hopefully, where Durham leads, others will follow. After all, with 26% of the population owning a dog, it makes good business sense too.

Congratulations Manchester – Buck Up Nottingham

Following a three month trial. It looks as if Manchester are going sanction canine travel. About time too.

They will limit it to two dogs per person and not allow dogs on at busy times, but at least it’s a step forward.

Unfortunately Nottingham still restricts access to assistance dogs (they have no choice as it’s a legal requirement) or insist that dogs are carried in bags – not possible for many breeds. Come on Nottingham: 26% of the country own at least one dog and not everyone can drive and they have a right to travel too. Surely, even if people d drive, it’s better that they use mass transport anyway.

Dogs On Beaches – Have Your Say

dogs on beach at North Foreland Cornwall Council have opened a consultation onto their summer restrictions on dogs on beaches.

This is a welcome opportunity for dog owners to represent their case, not least their legal obligations under the AWA 2006.

Only 20% of the population has children but 27% own at least one dog. Children are often not only a nuisance to other beach users and dogs but parents allow them to use the beach as a lavatory or dump used nappies.

Every beach user has moral and legal obligations to behave well and it is unfair that dogs have been excluded.

Have your say now – the consultation closes in November.

A Dog In Wolf’s Clothing

A Dog In Wolf's Clothing These images were captured in South Hams this week where farmer
Rich Rossiter asked “How many more sheep and lambs need to be chased off cliffs, into roads, pushed into cattle grids and bitten…”

He may well ask. It’s not the only recent attack in the area, certainly not a rare occurrence across the country and the figures are not heading in the right direction. Livestock worth an estimated £1.3m were attacked by dogs in 2020, representing an increase of more than 10% on 2019.

Research undertaken by the National Farmers Union underlines some of the reasons why this is getting worse. A survey of 1,200 dog owners found that 88% of respondents walk their dog in the countryside of which 64% allow their dog off lead and 50% admit to poor recall. Only 40% accepted that their dog could harm livestock.

Ewes are in lamb all across the country, with some farms starting lambing this month. Even if a dog does not make contact, those lambs could abort, causing them distress and the farmer huge disruption and losses.

Meanwhile New Forest Commoner Tom Gould lost 18 calves three days ago in 38 cattle due to neospora which is carried in canine faeces.

The message isn’t complex. Pick up waste and put your dog on the lead in the countryside: it’s not your playground, it’s peoples’ homes and supports their livelihoods. Then go and get training.

Quo Vadis 2022?

Quo Vadis 2022? It goes without saying that 2021 was an odd year for all of us. Maybe not as awful as 2020 but still one that most of us would not regret passing. But what did we accomplish for dogs and what can we expect for them in 2022?

Gadgets
Gadgets remain fashionable – not just restrictive halters, harnesses, leads and collars that are use in stead of training but now DogTV. I suppose that it was only a matter of time before colour-adjusted programmes would be broadcast, but, as my ex-boss and vet Stewart Halperin said when asked about it, it may be better than leaving a dog with nothing but it is not a substitute for company, exercise and direct stimulation.

The same must be said of monitoring cameras and trackers used as a substitute for training decent recall.

Non-aversive training
As more professionally certified, non-aversive trainers become qualified, it is to be hoped that more owners will be exposed to better and kinder training techniques.

Dog Theft
FOI requests made by the UKKC in July 2021 found that 98% of dog thieves criminals are never charged and in more than half of cases, a suspect is never identified. There were
196 cases of dog theft every month, a 7% increase from the previous year. Police forces found that criminals switched from county lines drugs trade which had been made difficult during lockdowns to a come in which they were guaranteed easy returns and little chance of consequences.

More than 500 dogs were estimated as stolen across the UK since the government’s Taskforce set up to tackle the issue in May 2021. Owners are still leaving dogs tied up unattended, walking them off-lead along roads (mostly illegal anyway) and not training reliable recall. Many new owners just want a “click and collect” dog and don’t ask questions as to where their “rescue” came from.

Legislation
The government has planned a lot of legislation including a new dog abduction offence announced in September 2021 as part of their Pet Theft Taskforce. The offence will be part of the proposed Kept Animals Bill which is currently in the report stage in the Commons.

This Bill proposes an extension of the penalties and definitions of livestock worrying with 2021 seeing a year on year increase in the number of animals injured and killed. There will also be enhanced powers of entry and seizure of suspected dogs, with JPs being able to order entry and search. Control orders can be applied to owner and offender if the latter is different and in the absence of either at the time of the attack. Penalties can include a destruction order and disqualification form keeping or owning dogs. Worrying is defined as chasing, causing injury or suffering, or causing abortion or loss of or diminution in produce and
being at large in a field or enclosure in which there are relevant livestock. The lists of species defined as livestock has also bene extended.

The number of dogs, cats or ferrets that can be brought into the UK legally in a vehicle would be reduced to 5 mainly in an attempt to stem the illegal import of dogs. (98% of “rescue” dogs are imported illegally). Regulations will also be implemented to restrict the age at which a dog or cat can be imported and the importation of pregnant dogs and ban the import of docked or crop-eared dogs.

The Petfished Campaign continues to educate people as to how to source dogs and cats ethically.

There are proposals to license animal sanctuaries and rescue and rehoming centres which could see the end of the illegal importation of dogs and lack of behavioural assessment and support. Let us hope.

In 2022, we could at last see a ban on e-collars, although no mention has been made of electric fences used to confine dogs.

The government also state that they will “Ensure that dangerous dogs legislation continues to provide effective public safety controls”. Not sure why they say “continue” as it is clearly ineffective.

Let us hope that all or most of this legislation passes and here’s to a happier 2022!

K Pup

One Man's Meat South Korea’s president has announced that a ban on dog meat is a possibility in the wake of waning popularity. The may millions of dogs slaughtered annually had dwindled to approximately 1 million and three major dog meat markets have closed. Nevertheless, there is likely to be opposition to the ban with the financial consequences largely hitting the country’s poorest people who rely on the trade.

Support for a ban may be a popular issue in forthcoming elections, with consumers being in a minority, but there is also a vociferous section the public that, although not consuming dog meat, opposes a ban on libertarian grounds. It remains t be seen whether it will be an easy vote winner or a source of polarisation and division.

Meanwhile, 53 dogs were rescued by police from an illegal trader who has been a significant player for two decades. It is claimed that he was slaughtering up to 30 dogs per day.

As with South Korea, the consumption of dog meat is a minority choice but the effect of animal welfare out of all proportion. Many of the dogs are stolen from owners and the trade has been blamed for spreading zoonoses, including rabies.