Want to Send a Dog to Its Death? Get ‘Qualified’ to do so in 240 Minutes
Posted By Alison Green Date: 12/02 Posted Under: Breed Specific Legislation, Canine Columns, Dangerous Dogs, Dog NewsKennel Club to train up Pit Bull Identification experts in just four hours
The Kennel Club, despite its cries of “Deed Not Breed” are planning to create a panel of “experts” trained to identify pit bull type dogs. I use the term “experts” lightly because these particular “experts” will attend a course just FOUR hours long.
The course, to be held at Battersea Dogs Home on the 18th February will run to the following agenda:
Course start 12pm with a 30-minute talk by Trevor Turner on how to identify a “pit bull type”.
Those in attendance will then spend one hour practicing their identification skills on an unknown number of dogs.
A further hour will be spent on an analysis of the findings by Trevor Turner.
Then a 30 minute break before an hour long talk from Trevor Cooper on the court proceedings for expert witness’s.
Course concludes at 4pm.
Whether there will be a “type” dog examined on the day by the trainees is unknown, if it is a registered dog it is safe, if not what will happen to this dog examined on the day?
My understanding, although as yet not confirmed, is at this stage you will receive a certificate of your “expert” status and are then able to use your new found knowledge where ever it may be needed.
I have a great respect for both Trevor Cooper and Trevor Turner. They both do fantastic work on defending cases of cross bred dogs accused of being Pit Bull types. Someone has to identify dogs under the current system we have,but is a “dangerous dogs identification day” really the role for a national pro-dog organisation to take?
What message does it send out; that on one hand it is widely accepted that you can not determine whether a dog is dangerous based on its physical appearance, but on the other hand you run a course to certify people to do just that, in your name, whilst still claiming to be “Deed Not breed”? Will we reach a position where a Kennel Club accredited “expert” gives evidence in a court of law for the prosecution of a family pet, or states a dog is “type” in a rescue or dog pound and a dog dies because it looks wrong?
I cannot understand how the Kennel club keep saying “Deed Not Breed” yet refuse to argue for an overhaul on the law due to “political climate” and are now training up “experts” in just four hours!
I have some knowledge on the law. I have seen plenty of so called “pit bull types” . Excuse me for shouting but YOU CANNOT TRAIN UP AN EXPERT IN JUST FOUR HOURS! These “experts” will be laughed out of court and dogs may die because of them.
It is thought that these experts are mainly vets and behaviourists. They will presumably, once they have their certificate, be able to go into pounds, rescues and anywhere they are asked to go and state whether, in their opinion, a dog is a pit bull type or not. I say “in their opinion” because that is all it is. An opinion based on just TWO AND A HALF HOURS hands on pit bull type identification training. On their say so a dog could live or die. That’s what it boils down to, particularly in rescues and pounds where no owner is there to fight for them. Those dogs are going to die. Just like Red.
There is the other side of it of course. A dog may be deemed “not type” by the KC experts. Only one problem with that. It will NOT make that dog safe. It it will not stop that dog being seized by someone else who believes the dog IS type. Until a dog is spared from being a pit bull type by a court of law it is not “safe”.
If it really was as easy as saying “so and so says it’s not type” we wouldn’t have any cases in court. In court we have those for the defence and those for the prosecution and it all falls on whom the judge believes. Even with the best experts with years of experience in identification and court proceedings you still lose on “type” more than you win.
The burden of proof is reversed; it’s up to you to prove your dog is not type. What of pets who are examined and found to be of “type”? What then? You cannot go and register the dog yourself to bring it within the law. What does an owner do? Dogs without owners who are then deemed to be of type will die. You cannot re home an unregistered pit bull type.
Will those owners whose dogs are seen by the so called experts, be fully aware of the extent of the training received? Will they be told that there are more experienced people out there who may have a totally different opinion? Will they seek a second opinion before a dog is killed?
The law is wrong. The Kennel Clubs “panel of experts” will not do anything to change that. What example does this set to others; how do you explain to someone that you cant judge a dog on its appearance although the Kennel Club does hold courses on it? Certifying volunteers to identify dogs as dangerous based on a measuring stick and a few ticks in the *right* boxes is, in my opinion, not promoting the good of all dogs. Law enforcement agencies have to do it, it is the law. Why are the Kennel Club doing it?
While they claim to be training for the defence, experts must remain impartial. The Kennel Club does not need to hold this course and should , if they really want to really do something to help stop whimpering “Deed not Breed” and start shouting for a complete removal of all BSL. Now. What ever the current climate. For dogs like Red.
Author DetailsAlison is a long time dog owner and dangerous dog legislation observer who lives with her family and four Bull Breed dogs in Sussex. - See this author's webpage
Popularity: 63% [?]
Tuesday, February 12th, 2008 at 6:12 am and is filed under Breed Specific Legislation, Canine Columns, Dangerous Dogs, Dog News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Alison, it is bad enough with some of the long term ‘breed experts’ getting it wrong, how can somebody who attends a course lasting 240 minutes be treated as an expert! Yet again the Kennel Club starts meddling and I am surprised at Battersea Dogs Home and at Trevor Cooper being involved in this charade. You are also dead right about the impartiality issue. I thought that there was anecdotal evidence that a former KC Chairman allegedly refused to help PBT owners in the late 80’s and early 90’s because of the ‘type’ of people who owned them, surely this was BSL even then with a bit of socio-economic/class distinction thrown in for good measure? I dont think that the Home Office two week dog identification course is long enough either but then again the government and the police can basically do what they want nowadays. The scenario you write about has already happened, a policeman who had apparently recently finished the Home Office Dog ID course was walking around a Blue Cross kennels in the south of England and pointed out that a dog in there had the characteristcis of a PBT type, the Blue Cross made the rescue centre take the dog back? They did this on the say so of a copper who had just done a two week course, why was he walking around the kennels, was he practicing? Kennel Club if you want to regain trust and respect, you sure don’t want to do it by holding this appalling course cancel it now!
Absolutely disgusting, why on earth is the KC getting involved in the identification process. I have worked with dogs day in and day out for twenty years. There is much to learn, there is absolutely NO WAY an expert can be trained in four hours.
The KC should cancel this course immeadietely and re-think, it’s the police that have the responsibility in identifing these dogs.
[…] Alison Green wrote this today. I think it is worth reading. Here is a little snippet:… accepted that you can not determine whether a dog is dangerous based on its physical appearance, but on the other hand you run a course to certify people to do just that, in your name, whilst still claiming to be “Deed Not breed”? … […]
I would correct Julie when she says that it is a police responsibility as it is actually also a local authority reponsibility (depending on how local authorities and the police choose to interpret the Act).
‘Expert Witness’ status is bandied around quite loosely these days and I pesonally doubt that it has ever been properly, formally, applied with regard to the Dangerous Dogs Act as the ’science’ in determining ‘type’ is itself highly debatable.
An accredited ‘Expert Witness’ will generally be included on the Register of Expert Witnesses and be checked by the law society. They will be accredited to give expert oponion on their own subject but will not be considered ‘expert’ in another so a chemist would not be expected to be giving expert witness evidence as a chartered accountant in a faud case or a chartered acountant evidenece regarding computer programming (unless he was also qualified to do so).
The trouble with the Dangerous Dogs Act is that the ‘expertise’ brought to bear on determining type can be varied - its not a purely veterinary matter, its not a pure breed judge matter, its not just a behaviourist matter. This is partly due to the law itself being completely vague and requiring definition by court cases (cases law) and partly due to the fact that it is a very emotive subject.
But we could spend hours looking at what ‘expert’ witnesses have been responsible for in the Dangerous Dogs Act. It’s just a shame that so much law gets written now in a way that earns them lots of dosh.
I have never earned one penny from the Dangerous Dogs Act. I have consistently opposed section one (BSL)before and since it was intoduced. I have however used my expertise to prosecute under setion one because until it is repealled it is the law, only in that respect has it been part of my working life (for which I do get paid).
Crazy Canine and Julie are both quite right, the Kennel Club should keep itself well away from this and, frankly, so should the two Trevors - for whom I too have the greatest respect.
I have the gravest of doubts about the number of people who oppose the Dangerous Dogs Act but make considerable sums of money from it - as expert witnesses and providing training for more ‘expert witnesses’ to prolong arguments in court which keep dogs in incarceration for which the authorities are then blamed (turning cases about ‘type’ into cases about ‘welfare’).
The Kennel Club above all should be working to sort out the repeal of section one and the replacement of this law with something efficient in the management of all dogs. It is now clearly supporting the law as it stands (proposals to ‘modernise’ the Dangerous Dogs Act in Scotland, supported by the Kennel Club, does not even ask for repeal of section one) and now they want to train people to implement it - Why?
I think the Kennel Club should be asked to clarify their position.
CrazyCanine,
Re Breed Identification being difficult: Totally agree. A survey in America used 687 volunteers, over a 100 of which where canine professionals. All the volunteers had “first hand experience of APBT. ” They used 22 breeds of dog including one JRT, Golden Ret, Boxer and APBT.
A shocking 2% picked out the APBT without also wrongly identiying other breeds as APBT. 63% of those present thought a Boxer was an APBT!
The result where evaluated in relation to experience with canines and the conlusion was that visual identification of APBT among other non related pure bred dogs is not reliable even for canine professionals.
Yet we STILL do it.
Great article Allie. A shame that the two experts are putting their name and time to it. I don’t become surprised at the KC’s antics anymore though.
Posted by Cuthbert Jackson 13th February, 2008 at 1:57 am
I would correct Julie when she says that it is a police responsibility as it is actually also a local authority reponsibility (depending on how local authorities and the police choose to interpret the Act).
Cuthbert,
Thank you for your response, my main point was that IT IS NOT THE KC’S RESPONSIBILITY to be doing this.
After reading this I for one would want to know who was assessing my dog. And what for the dogs in rescue centres that may be id’d as type? Does anyone assess their behaviour?
It strikes me that when irreversable decisions are being made (dog pts or not) that the highest level of assessments should be made and cross referenced with other experts to ensure the right decisions are being made.
My opinion is still that the KC should cancel this course asap.
Julie
I quite agree, it’s not the Kennel Club’s responsibility and they are indicating by becoming involved that they do not see the repeal of BSL as practical and have given up on it when, in my opinion, they should be leading the campaign - if they really support ‘breed not deed’ that is.
Although some ‘experts’ might like it to be the case the law makes no requirement for an assessment of behaviour to prove that a dog is of ‘type’. The law decided that all dogs of that ‘type’(predominantly decided by physical attributes) were dangerous when it was created. What has now established is that a dog can be of ‘type’ but also be accepted by the court to being no threat to the public (i.e. not dangerous) and suitable for control through the requirements of the exemption register - which the court, and the court alone, can open for that purpose (usually done at the request of the prosecution). This actually reflects the fact that the Pit Bull Terrier is not a dangerous ‘type’ of dog per se, it is however a prohibited dog.
English Law is NOT co-operative it is adversarial, it does not therefore cross reference its ‘experts’. Sometimes the experts will actually agree on ‘type’, sometimes not, and there are many reasons for this, one of which is that it is not a suitable subject for ‘experts’ as the Law itself lacks definition.
But there are other ‘irreversible’ and ‘right’ decisions you have not taken into account. It would be an irreversible decision for an officer, believing a dog to be a pit bull terrier type to ignore that fact once it is brought to his attention, but it would not be right and should anything happen that decision would be brought back to him, if only in his own conscience.
So think about this for one moment:
Many of the ‘defences’ in court since January 2007 have been based on the ignorance of the owner with regard to what kind of dog they had. That the dog’s owner did not know the ‘type’ of dog that they had. Let me suggest this, failure to appreciate fully the implications of the ‘type’ of dog you choose to own, is a clear indication of irresponsible ownership. German Shepherds, Rottweilers, Spaniels, Labradors, Newfoundlands, Akitas, Staffordshire Bull Terriers, have a range of predictable behaviours which you should appreciate before you get them. To fail to do so is irresponsible.
Likewise, when a dog’s genetics are not fully documented looking at ‘type’ has always given anyone with a good eye for dogs an idea what to expect. Yes things can and will be different with each and every dog but deciding to make decisions on chance and ignorance leads to accidents which leads to bad reputations for the type of dog involved (which usually also conform with popularity fads).
At the end of the day, a number of the ‘experts’ are in it for the dosh (as has been mentioned above), the status and kudos they get and also perhaps to make amends for previous involvement in the DDA when they were the ‘be all end all’ of getting it pushed through? The danger is from most kind of ‘experts’ in any disciplines but on this occasion mainly those ‘experts’ who convinced the Tories to get the DDA passed by their then expert opinion of APBT. Where is any form of reply from the Kennel Club then, they allegedly have their finger on the pulse of all matters canine according to their website, so where is their response to Alisons excellent article? Finally as mentioned by Cuthbert and Julie, it is not the remit of the Kennel club anyway so what are they playing at?
I am shocked!!
Humour me but I read this as being the equivalent to (in human terms) racial, sexual etc discrimination. If you only need four hours to work out whether a dog should live or die, then why do you need to study for so long to be a teacher, a doctor or a vet? Is this just not people playing God? What gives them the right . . no disrespect, and I admit I am no expert, but I know many a small breed terrier type dog that in my mind is more of a “dangerous dog” than many of the so called “dangerous dog breeds”?
The world has gone mad!!!
The Kennel Club is disappointed not to have been approached to comment on this story.
The reason this seminar has been organised is because for many years the Kennel Club has held a list of people who have been able to act as witnesses for the defence. We have now reached the situation where there are only a few people who are able to do this across the UK. This seminar, and similar meetings we have held, is designed to extend this list which will ultimately assist in preventing further dogs being wrongly identified.
Glad you could comment. You mention similar meetings? May I ask what those meetings are aimed at and how many you have held?
May I also ask how your list will prevent dogs being “wrongly identified” when it appears your “experts” have just four hours training? the police course is ten days long if I recall correctly.
Finally do you still intend to go ahead with the course and what provsisions are in place to ensure those you “train” up do not use their new knowledge to work for the prosecution as a paid expert?
I would like to know if these ‘experts’ will be assessing dogs in rescue pounds, rescue centres etc
I am a behaviourist with twenty years experience of working with dogs day in and day out and am also a behaviourist that works with a number of rescue centres.
I would be grateful if the KC would comment.
[…] the heck happened to the British being dog-friendly? Thanks to the fabulous K9 Magazine for barking about this travesty. Want to Send a Dog to Its Death? Get ‘Qualified’ to do so in […]
The Kennel Club’s response in this case clearly reflects the problem when in its statement they say:
“…the Kennel Club has held a list of people who have been able to act as witnesses for the defence. We have now reached the situation where there are only a few people who are able to do this across the UK.”
I must point out that an “EXPERT WITNESS” should not be acting for the prosecution or the defence, their duty is purely towards the court to guide and direct on the area in which they have expertise.
The Kennel Club’s statement indicates precisely why, in my opinion, they should never be allowed to advise on Law.
If they are simply wishing to provide witnesses for the defence who will hold the opinion that the dog is innocent ask Alison ask Mel ask anyone from Deed not Breed, they will tell the court how stupid the law is to bring before it dogs because of their looks and they will probably be less likely to do so without trying to prove in an expert way that the dog is not a Pit Bull terrier type when it is, because in their view, and mine, to make a decision about danger from appearance is unreasonable regardless of breed.
If on the other hand they want to provide more ‘expert witness’ they should be aware that above all that witness must be impartial and be presenting their own expert knowledge. It will take considerably longer than 4 days to get to that point and, because of the nature of this law it will open their expertise to criticism.
In my earlier comment I pointed out that UNFORTUNATELY in this kind of situation English Law is ADVERSARIAL but within it the true ‘expert witness’ is supposed to be impartial you do not get ‘expert’ defence witnesses or ‘expert’ prosecution witnesses.
It is unfortunate that this law is so subject to the concept of expert witness rather than other forms of convincing evidence. It is if anything more of a burden for those bringing prosecutions than for those now seen as ‘defending’ dogs, as those bringing prosecutions cannot ignore the evidence - that a dog is a Pit Bull Terrier type - and MUST bring their judgement of that to court.
Unless the Law is changed!
‘The Kennel Club is disappointed not to have been approached to comment on this story.’
THE ABOVE IS FROM THE KENNEL CLUB POST ON THE ISSUE OF THE FOUR HOUR BREED ID COURSE
Although, the Kennel Club seem’s to be selective on what it will comment on?
When approached by K9 Magazine (see article on Breed Society suing the KC) the KC did not comment?
You cannot have it both ways!
Anyway answer Alison and Cuthbert’s questions!
With reference to requests here for the Kennel club to cancel the course; To date my understanding is that the course is still going ahead as planned. If the Kennel Club have information to the contary Im sure they will post it here as they are aware of this article and its comments.
Alison
They wll not listen to us, but it is nice to see that not everybody falls for the male cow faeces that comes from them and more and more people are seeing the light too!
What I do not really understand is whether they want to be an enforcement agency in regard to their ideas that they pass on to the government or they want to be an elitist breed registration organisation? They should decide as it blurs in to them pushing for certain legislative actions and then on the other hand having a sub organisation that in a totally unelected way imposes itself on councils to write dog control orders with them? What knowledge of the local conditions do they have apart from what they are told by people who have one agenda, their own, do they take in comments from people who may want some dog control orders? Amazingly not all dog owners are responsible as you will know, if there can be a halfway approach to the need for certain dog control orders, great, but they need to remember that they are a single interest group with a very vested interest and councils should treat them as a hostile witness in this respect.
Well theres another child mauled today by one of these great pitbul types that people are so eager to save what about that poor child ,oh I forgot there is no bad dogs just stupid kids and irrisponsible owners.
That must be why the internet is full of websites extolling the fighting poweress of these dogs and how game they are and the fights they have won oh and how good they are at stopping people and the great protection dogs they make .
WOW. to think giving people with only four hours experience the power to destroy gods animal. How on earth do you call this a salution, hasn’t innocent dogs and families suffered enough through other peoples ignorance??????
I find that this subject is getting more worrying as the days go by…
I have been to the United States and have seen 1st hand what these so called Devil dogs are capable of. Yes they can be a dangerous animal but in the right hands they are very loving animals. I have seen them used for thearaphy and housed within families. I personaly think that it is the terrible owners that proceed to give these beautiful creatures such a bad name….
I hope for one day sense is used before ignorant decisions are made.
I hope this last statment does not cause a fuss, as i also believe that KC are wrongly persuing the road of hatered and disrespect toward themselfs.
Why are kc bred dogs in such bad conformation?
Inbred dogs causing disabilities within the breed, it is the biggest disgrace I have ever seen……
Hi Paul,
Your raise a fair point. There are websites proclaiming exactly what you say they do. We know they are there, yet little appears to be done about it. The “sport” of dog fighting is barbaric, cruel and owners or participants who enjoy such a thing deserve to be caught and dealt with. I wholeheartedly agree with that.
However, I also think this is an owner problem, not a dog problem. For example; Micheal Vick had a huge number of dogs which he used to fight. One dog has gone on to be a therapy dog. Most of the others, if i remember correctly, have gone onto pet homes. Each dog needs to be assessed properly but this alone shows, its not a problem with the whole breed or type.
There are many factors that can lead to a dog biting. One of the biggest problems in this country is we do nothing to see what causes a dog to bite. Without that knowledge we will never be able to completly tackle the problem.
The recent story of a rottie stated as attacking and killing his owner is another good example. The dog did not kill his owner. His owner died of natural casues and it appears the dog was confused as to what had happened. However this isnt what was seen in the minds of those present at the time and the dog was shot and killed.
I would like all dogs that have bitten/attacked to be seen by professionals to see where the root/cause of the problem lies. It could be irresponsible owner, bad breeding, illness. The list is endless. This isnt to say the dog must be rehomed. Some will not be able too and we also have to ask how many homes would take in a dog that has attacked. However we still lack this vital information which could really help reduce attacks.
We do have a problem but imho it isnt a breed or type problem. It is a much bigger range of problems and thatis what is needed to be dealt with.
Hi Alison
The point of the websites is the interent is coming down with such websites ,if dogfighting and the use of these dogs for protection is as common as the websites is it any wonder pitbull types are in serious trouble and getting banned around the world ,it is not as if these dogs are rare ,the rescues are overflowing with them everywhere they are being bred on a production line ,everybody says blame the owners well I agree it is mostly the owners faults ,its the pitbul type owners faults because they are getting and keeping dogs that they cannot control or in lots of cases wont control.
Its pitbul types owners who are breeding aggressive dogs from aggressive dogs and perpetrating more aggressive dogs ,its pitbull type owners who are letting their dogs run loose getting into the headlines ,its pitbull type owners who are letting their dogs attack other peoples pets when they are out walking them .
Its pitbull type owners who are breeding these dogs willy nilly and selling them to anyone with the cash ,its pitbull type owners who delight in shouting about keep the breed true to itself as fighting dogs because this is what made the breed what it is ,as was stated at the start of the post look at how common these websites are on the internet ,its all at your fingertips
So lets put the blame for all the problems of the pitbull types have around the world where it lies on the doorstep of pitbull type owners and breeders they are the ones that are creating all the damage to the pitbull types because these owners are the ones that own pitbull types nobody else.
Well they say a few of Vicks dogs were rehomed but there was a few of them killed to ,also the homes for these dogs would have been well vetted and chosen they would just not of been handed out to anyone that wanted one if they were actually homed at all
Now I am sure they will be some along to go into their usual tirade and throw childish tantrums when someone voices and opinion that goes against the usual pitbull type owners speel ,but then they are good are trying to scare anyone who has a different opinion to them and also very good at manipulating others to stand up and fight for pitbull types while they actually do nothing productive about it except tap away on their keyboard
Hi Paul,
You are right on much of what you say. I dont think many people will deny it to be honest. Yes the dog where bred for fighting, still are by some people. I have already mentioned my thought on those people. A point that shouldnt be over looked however is even in the horrific dog fighting world, a “people biter” is not tolerated. These dogs are killed. A recent documentary shown on dog fighting in the U.K. showed this is still true.
My main point however is that the Breed Specific aspect of the law doesnt stop this from happening. we have laws for dog fighting, increased under the Animal Welfare act.
There are still most certainly owners of “type” dogs who shouldnt have, in my opinion, any living creature at all. But I also firmly beleive there are owners of any other breeds and cross breeds who shouldnt, in my opinion, have any living creature at all.
This is where I honestly think the law fails us, all of us. I have four children. I want to see something in place to do its utmost to stop any of mine being bitten by any dog. I want to take my children to school without having to avoid the dog mess that people cannot be bothered to pick up.
This is what I honestly want to see in place. I have worked with owners of “type” dogs and done what I can to help them get their dogs back. I have also refused to help some I feel are a danger to people mainly due to the owner not the dog. I am just one person though. We need a law that protects. This law doesnt and I think it would be fair to say we both agree on that.
DNB were made aware of the training day just over a week ago and immediately contacted the KC to voice our concerns. DNB asked for and were given permission to attend but have since decided it would be inappropriate for us to do so.
We, like many have concerns and have voiced these with the KC.
We have no desire to enter into a public debate on the rights or wrongs of the course.
A study at Canineresearch.net shows that 98% of the participants (including veterinarians and other animal experts) could not positively identify a Pit Bull without also misidentifying other breeds as such. And these people are presuming to spawn experts in less than a day? I’ve been around APBTs and Pit Bull-types for nearly 20 years, and I still encounter dogs that stump me. For interest’s sake, I’d love to take the course and see just how accurate it is, compared to my own life’s experience.
I’m beginning to feel like the world is becoming a big Twilight Zone episode.
Lindsay
You have been around APBT’s and APBT-types for nearly 20 years and you are still unsure on occasion! That say’s it all about this course then really! If Lindsay has that much experience of working and being around such dogs, just what level of knowledge will be imparted on this course for those who may not have the exposure that people like Lindsay and Alison have had with these dogs or may rarely come into contact with them?
Interesting a dog can judged to be killed after 4 hours training but it takes years to qualify to judge the prettiest dog, hippocracy at it’s worst.
Given that Staffies and English Bull Terriers are ‘pit bull’ types how does that get ignored?
Surely experts must truly be experts, not self styled experts. How many of these experts will have owned or bred these dogs?
In effect this is typical of the anticompanion animal movement (PETA & the RSPCA) which wants no pets, but for the dog industry to become involved is quite bizarre.
hi Paul
I agree with what you say on the subject that it is the majority of owners that cause this disgraceful movement against these type of animals, but I also think this behavior is in almost every type of animal. In more acurate documentation it is shown around the world that it is other breeds that actually bite more often but aren’t exposed by the media because it “doesn’t sell”……I agree in the wrong hands this breed can be dangerous but so can cross bred/working types dogs eg rotties, am bulldogs, patterdales, Greyhounds and even the KC staffordshire bull terriers were once used for hunting and probably still are. Any of these can be dangerous as straight bred or crossed with each other, so for me there has to be a better salution in the manner in which this matter is resolved.
I have seen a english bullterrier crossed with a mastif on dog borstal that looked like a pitbull type, does that mean it should be put down?
The saying dont judge a book by its cover springs to mind.
I just wish others thought the same as me…….
But i guess we aren’t all the same…………………
This makes me sick!! Nothing else to say!!
[…] the KC more than the Government? Don’t know if you read this article relating to the KC and BSL Want to Send a Dog to Its Death? Get ‘Qualified’ to do so in 240 Minutes Ultimately if we can’t trust the Govt which is DEFRA to enforce and implement dog laws, we’re in […]