BRITAIN'S UNWANTED PETS - PANORAMA-BBC One, Monday 2nd August, 8.30 pm

Mupette

hethmar wrote: »

Well I just steeled myself to watch that clip and to be honest, poor bloody Brandy is going to be put down after a few second test where they walk him up to another dog. Brandy goes stiff and pulls on the lead and is deemed too aggressive to live. Well, Im sorry but I think my 2.5 legged Jack Russell would do exactly the same thing in the same circs. Surely they should give a few more tests before they kill dogs.

I'm with you on this, based on the tests, mine should be pts.

mine if he sees another dog will tug on lead, and bark.. it's lack of socialisation on my part, but Brandy was wagging the tail and didn't look aggressive in the sense of bareing teeth and snarling, in fact i was surprised how quiet he was

Minxy_Bella

Fang wrote: »

Whatever anyone else may think, those people work with these dogs day in and day out and know what the signs of aggression are better than anyone here.

It's a good thing we don't do the same with humans then, isn't it?

You know, snap judgements and all that :eek:

Person_one

Fang wrote: »

Whatever anyone else may think, those people work with these dogs day in and day out and know what the signs of aggression are better than anyone here.

I think there are quite a few people on here who are fairly knowledgeable about dog behaviour.

If what was shown on the camera was the only test, and 'aggression' was the only reason those dogs were destroyed, then the test wasn't thorough enough. However I doubt that either of those are the case.

Mupette

Fang wrote: »

Whatever anyone else may think, those people work with these dogs day in and day out and know what the signs of aggression are better than anyone here.

Really!!!!!

I am not sure tbh of your statement, some of us have been around dog's all our lives, day in and day out, just as equal to judge, and dedicated.

Some are more experts than others on here depending on breed.

Take FC, i would go to them for advice every time.

elsien

All of which, although interesting, is a bit of a distraction from the main point of the programme, which is how to stop dogs of whatever type from being dumped.
The dog licence didn't work, and there will always be those who find their way round any new system, as the continued underground breeding of fighting dogs/pitbulls shows. Which is no reason not to come up with an alternative, as I think a lot of people dumping animals are irresponsible/thoughtless rather than plain bad, and it's more a symptom of our disposable consumer society than anything else. Not sure how you'd even start tackling that one.

Mupette

elsien wrote: »

All of which, although interesting, is a bit of a distraction from the main point of the programme, which is how to stop dogs of whatever type from being dumped.
The dog licence didn't work, and there will always be those who find their way round any new system, as the continued underground breeding of fighting dogs/pitbulls shows. Which is no reason not to come up with an alternative, as I think a lot of people dumping animals are irresponsible/thoughtless rather than plain bad, and it's more a symptom of our disposable consumer society than anything else. Not sure how you'd even start tackling that one.

how about these breeders get put in small dog crates and see how they like it

foreign_correspondent

simontheiceman wrote: »

!!!!!! it; I have my weekly trip to the Borough kennels tomorrow. I may well get away without having to euthanase a single resident, and recently there have been fewer to kill. The problem lies with the complete lack of responsibility shown by a large number of dog owners. I'd love to say it was a very few, but with the kind of people I work with its commonplace. I see vast numbers of "serial puppy owners" who never manage to get a dog past a year of age. Once the "cute" has worn off they want a new one, sign the older dog over to the kennels and go and get one. What gets me is that these people are all on benifits (misspelling deliberate) and can manage to find £300 for a new Staffie cross but not enough love to keep it for more than a year. A good number go on to perhaps keep a !!!!! a bit longer to see if they can make some money from breeding, but as I am sure you are all aware there is sod all profit in dog breeding and a lot of graft (they work this out a bit late; unfortunately). Since when did a Staffie cross puppy cost more than £50 anyway? We need full traceability and soon. I know the responsible will hate it but thats just tough - we have to do somehting mroe than we are doing right now. The Dangerous dogs act needs action and that WILL happen so lets get this sorted as well.

thankyou - I have just been saying the same thing over in DT - the bloke who was saying, quite confidently 'I will get £250 for a dog, and £350 for a b1tch' - he was clearly naive - I would like them to have done a follow up visit, to see how many he had actually sold for that - the reality is, he probably reduced them to £100, then £50, and now has half a dozen nine week old pups that he doesn't know what to do with sh1tting all over his flat...

More and more litters are being handed over to rescue, as the market is flooded.

I also thought it could have highlighted the fact that is isn't just staffs who are put to sleep - in many places, jack russells and lurchers do not have good odds either.

hethmar

Brandy was about as aggressive as 75% of dogs would be in the same situation. Poor little sod.

nikki702

http://www.battersea.org.uk/about_us/whats_new/panorama_programme.html

"In the case of Brandy, the Staffordshire Bull Terrier shown on tonight’s Panorama programme, Battersea’s team of behavourists carried out extensive assessment, behavioural work and reassessment of the dog over a period of time. The programme shows only a snapshot of this work done to help this dog and does not detail any of the more obvious signs of real and consistent aggression shown by Brandy towards other dogs"

foreign_correspondent

hethmar wrote: »

Brandy was about as aggressive as 75% of dogs would be in the same situation. Poor little sod.

My thought too - imagine you have just spent a week in a pen, surrounded by barking dogs, not all of whom sound friendly - you may never have met many dogs before, so its bound to be nerve-wracking and make you feel anxious - then you are taken into a strange building and confronted with a dog you have never seen before... you have very little time to suss out if it is friend or foe, so you give it a bit of a vocal warning that you aren't a pushover, just to protect yourself... all seems pretty logical to me.

When my mum first got her lurcher, and we introduced her to my dog, there was lots of growling, raised heckles, barks and even a few snaps on either side - it never occured to me it wasnt just part of sorting out the dynamics, and we didnt let them meet nose to nose till they had walked together. Lots of praise for calm behaviour followed, and over a few meetings they settled down - now they are best of mates, and very happy in one another's company. Based on the battersea assessment we should have just had them both put down!