Comments on: Exclusive: Major British Animal Charity in Breed Specific Legislation Controversy

By: Are the RSPCA Seizing Dogs Under Section 1 of the Dangerous Dogs Act?

Are the RSPCA Seizing Dogs Under Section 1 of the Dangerous Dogs Act? — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 14:29:21 +0000

[...] seems to be another example of a Major National Animal Welfare Charity publicly stating one position and then acting in a completely opposite [...]

By: Crazy Canine

Crazy Canine — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 20:49:40 +0000

Caz

How is your Tosa perceived by the public where you live? The breed was added to the list of prohibited dogs at the start of the DDA but apparently there was only ever one Tosa in the UK and the owner took him/her overseas before the prohibition came in. True what you say about your terrier though, little scamps!

Alison

You have hit the nail on the head, all the large animal welfare groups are on these types of committees and work groups, it is just that not all of them come to the surface around the time such things hit the ground and before we knew it they became law. Probably easier to try to find some kind of dog advisory group to government that none of these large welfare groups are on?

By: Caz

Caz — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 02:21:39 +0000

The main problem in the UK as I see it, is that puppies are bred for money without any thought of temperement or socialising or general health – looks are all. I have a 2 year old male tosa who is gentle, well socialised and loves other dogs – my female jack russell is a monster by comparison. Obviously we keep a careful eye on him because of the bad press the breed receives – but a dog with a sweeter nature I cannot find.

By: Alison Green

Alison Green — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 08:37:19 +0000

Interesting comments. Forgive me if this has been previously mentioned but if I recall correctly the Blue cross make up part of the Dangerous Dogs Act Study group, who thought up the Control of Dogs Act that they claim repeals BSL . However if you read the actual proposal it does NOT repeal BSL at all.

By: Crazy Canine

Crazy Canine — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 22:17:23 +0000

Just remembered a previous reference to the Blue Cross and BSL, this is from the K9 Magazine article about the 240 minute breed ID course (you can find it elsewhere on this website):

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!

By: Crazy Canine

Crazy Canine — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 22:09:49 +0000

Just realised that in my last post I should have said
all the ‘big gun’ dog and animal ‘charidee’ establishment involved. I was not saying anything about big gun dog organisations….phew!

By: Crazy Canine

Crazy Canine — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 22:07:11 +0000

Julie

Interesting that you worked for the Blue Cross and they had this type of BSL in operation a number of years ago, how many years ago was that?

Dave the Dog

It is like a bad dream that unfortunately has all the big gun dog and animal ‘charidee’ establishment involved in it. They are advising MP’s and government types about how WE the ordinary people should be governed regarding our dogs. Well frightening, but sadly not that unexpected. Great to see yet again K9 Magazine standing up for the ordinary dog owner and bringing these double standards and BSL type issues out in the open.

By: Julie

Julie — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 18:34:02 +0000

Absolutely disgusting. Having said that I worked for the Blue Cross some years ago and the centre and Manager I worked for already had the (unwritten) policy of not admitting staffy types. I asked head office at the time and a number of reasons/excuses were given.

They certainly do not get my support after a spell working at one of their centres.

By: Alison Green

Alison Green — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 18:05:40 +0000

I would like to know if my perfectly legal American Bulldogs will get vet treatment by a blue cross center.

Will someone from the Blue cross please answer this question?

By: Dave the Dog

Dave the Dog — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 20:34:14 +0000

You couldn’t make it up! (To quote a well known blogging Police Inspector) RSPCA, Kennel Club, various UK MP’s, the Red Tops and other Media and now the BLUE CROSS?
How on earth do they include the American Bull Dog and the Red nose(?) Stafforshire Bull Terrier ??? I’ve been doing this job for years and thats a new one on me. Yet more problems for the poor old Staffie. The constant repetition of the same ‘types’ doesn’t help their credibility. Is it another example of if they repeat something often enough it must be right?
These big organisations seem to be becoming more like politicians all the time. ‘We will say one thing to you in public but practice the opposite when we think you won’t notice. If you do notice we will repeat constantly that we didn’t mean it that way and it’s a misunderstanding on your part’