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

hethmar

Youdontseeme. In theory chipping at birth would be fine BUT we are not talking about run of the mill everyday joes like ourselves. We are talking about low lifes who will have no compulsion but to dump a dog if its found not to be chipped. And most of them are so transient that you could never trace them anyway. When chipped dogs arrive in the pound, someone will go to the address and 9.9 times out of 10 the people there will deny they own the dog or "sold it to a man in a pub last month". I still think compulsory neutering is the only way forward.

Youdontseeme

I still think compulsory neutering is the only way forward.

You may be right although no lovely mongrels to chose from, thats almost criminal in itself!

Perhaps having bad owners put down IS the better option!

PinkPeach

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 have a springer spaniel who in the same situation would growl and lunge forward towards the other dog. He's soppy once he reaches the other dog though so it's quite shocking to know that in that situaton he'd be a gonner. Although I can see why this test takes place, it's only one test with one other dog. Dogs are often like people, they like some others but not always all so I guess it's luck on the day whether they react in a positive way.

I felt very sorry for the vet who has the job of killing these dogs. He was clearly upset talking about it at one point as his jaw started to tremble. It must be a terrible burden on him as there is no ideal answer - if he does this he knows he's killing a healthy dog and if he doesn't, what will happen to them?

It infuriates me that only caring and responsible owners will feel strongly about the issues raised in this program and that those who breed dogs for cash would feel nothing as the dog is a commoditiy.
Sadly, there are two such people who live on my street who use their dogs as a means of extra income on top of their benefits. It breaks my heart as these dogs are never walked and no fuss is ever made of them. It's sad to see at certain times of year a few people walking around with their newly aquired puppy rotties and you never know what happens to them after that as you never see them again.

orlao

The thing that struck me while watching was what a tough time all the people working at Battersea and the other places featured must have (I include the vets and volunteers btw). I'm guessing they went into rescue work because they love animals and having to deal with the sheer numbers of dogs and lack of homes and by necessity having to make decisions like that every day must be heartbreaking.

Using my head rather my heart I understand each and every one of the calls they made and actually applaud them for doing so. The only other thing I would have liked to see in the programme was a little bit of positive PR for the staffies as it was an opportunity to promote them as a family pet to a prime time audience but I suppose the programme was only 30 minutes.....

sharronloves2spend

Personally i think the problem with these dogs are that they fall into the wrong hands. Staffies arn't the best at being around other dogs, therefore need socialising from day 1, they are lively and very wilful. An unexperienced owner may not know how to deal with these issues they then become a problem, giving staffies a bad reputation, which is totally unfair on the dog, when an owner can no longer cope the dog is dumped.

Speaking from experience, my girl who is a x staffie who came to us at 10 weeks old from the Rspca, we exposed her to as many kinds of dogs and situations as early on as possible, she needed training, lots of it, and now is a 5 year old well balanced dog, she like dogs, cats, people and has never shown an inch of aggression. She is very active and loves to be exercised. We also have JRT who probably has more aggression than the staffie.

I genuinly don't know the answer. Overbreeding and them falling into the wrong hands are the problems, i only wish the answer was so easily defined. It broke my heart watching the vet putting that dog to sleep, so very very sad, i gave my girls an extra special hug after that.

Sharron

hethmar

Youdontseeme wrote: »

You may be right although no lovely mongrels to chose from, thats almost criminal in itself!

Perhaps having bad owners put down IS the better option!

If only, if only ............

It may be that mongrels would still exist as there is always the chance of registered breeders having accidents.

WolfSong2000

evilmonkeychops wrote: »

I have been training dogs for more than 30 years, both on a one to one basis and in a group setting. In recent years there has been no breed of dog to rival the Staffordshier Bull Terrier for dog aggression in my experience.
They problem with staffies is that they can change from friendly to aggressive in a split second and before you know it they have got hold of another dog-and they dont like letting go.
They do not give the normal warning that most other dogs give-there is usually just a slight stiffeneing of their body. All three of my dogs (lab and 2 springers) have ben attacked by staffies and one was very seriously hurt and had many stitches.
There have also been incidents at training classes that we run and we have had 2 different dogs badly bitten by staffs.
We are now extremely careful about taking on staffs into group work due to their unpredictability.
I dont know what it is that makes staffs like this-maybe their fighting past? (as they were developed as a fighting breed) While i do think that they are generally ok with people, they are an absolute liability around other dogs.
Please bear in mind that my comments are based on experience gained over many years -they are not just based on a few random incidents. My main job involves working with dogs and i do training part time.

Staffies have been bred (in more recent years) by some unscrupulous people to give little to no warning when they're about to attack - it's considered an asset in dog fighting :mad:.

What I will say is that well bred, well trained staffies are an absolute joy to be around. They're amazing people/family dogs, but because of potential issues with other dogs they do need proper training. *If* they are correctly trained and socialised you'd be much less likely to have a problem.

What you're forgetting is that all dogs can be potentially aggressive. I've dealt with a basenji cross who would take a random dislike to people and actively attack them - with no warning. You just had to be careful about how you handled him, and be aware of this in social situations. Another time a neighbour bought a golden retriever because they were a fan of my family's one at the time. They didn't research the breeder and ended up with an (eventually) sickly dog who could be very aggressive toward certain people (usually the poor postman).

What I am trying to say is that *any* dog has the potential to have aggressive tendencies, and I feel it's unfair that you're singling out staffies. I've found (in my own fairly extensive experience) that terriers are far more likely to be aggressive. On the other hand, brreds like staffies, dobermans, etc, with the right owners can be the most wonderful, pleasant dogs imaginable.

simontheiceman

Well; the good news is that there were no dogs to put to sleep at the borough kennels today and looks like that will be the case next week as well . That had nothing to do with TV - just good management by the kennel staff.

Mutter_2

simontheiceman wrote: »

Well; the good news is that there were no dogs to put to sleep at the borough kennels today and looks like that will be the case next week as well . That had nothing to do with TV - just good management by the kennel staff.

Do you have a link for donations? Thanks.

CFC

foreign_correspondent wrote: »

.. having kids is different though - if you stop people breeding it veers into the territory of eugenics - stopping dogs from breeding is just good animal husbandry.

Ah, there we differ. I see it as eugenics in dogs as well (or as good animal husbandry should apply to people, perhaps!). I also disapprove strongly of the tendency to 'professionalise' everything in life.
I see the suggestion as putting far too much power into the hands of professional breeders. As far as breeders are concerned, soon it would be KC breeds only, the genetic genepool would be diminished, and sooner or later the only dogs you could purchase, instead of healthy mongrels, would be dogs who were totally unable to walk after reaching puberty or with heads guaranteed to explode from the pressure of their brains within their skulls. That's how responsible breeders actually are in truth....