Tootsie, an 18 month old staffie cross was seized on Tuesday morning after police acted on a warrant believing that Tootsies was a “pit bull type”. As the law allows, Tootsie was seized and taken to a secret location to await an examination to determine if she fitted the standard used for a banned breed.

However Tootsies owner Mikala Coulthard received a telephone call later that day to say that when they went to check on Tootsie she was missing leaving her family heartbroken.

Mikala says “We have been trying to get some information from the police but they will not disclose any information as to what area she was taken to or escaped from! I understand the need for not disclosing where the kennels are but how can we look for her when we don’t know where to look? All they keep saying is she must have jumped a 6.5 fence and that they have officers out looking for her.

Tootsie is a family pet and has never been in any trouble before. She lives with children who keep asking when shes coming home and another dog who is pining for her.

Tootsie is friendly with people and dogs and we are worried that it’s been nearly 3 days now. She will be cold, tired and hungry and we beg anyone to please call if they see her. It may be someone has taken her into their home and we would ask those people to please contact the police on 0845 33 00 222 so we can get our baby back!”

Charlotte, owner of rescue Staffordshire Bull Terrier Meatball, says ”The law right now is ridiculous and must be changed, all dogs have the potential to be dangerous but also all dogs have a much greater potential to change and fulfil the lives of their owners. Punishing people’s pets that have done nothing wrong on the basis of their appearance is terrible; they are family members who are loved. The truth is dogs bring more joy to people than they bring harm – but that doesn’t make headlines”

The current legislation has come under fire again recently with major organisations demanding the legislation is scrapped and a new bill proceeding through Parliament that removes the emphasis off the type of dog and places it firmly on the owners. The Metropolitan police expect to spend a staggering £10,000,000 of taxpayer’s money on enforcement of the current failed legislation over the next four years with the vast majority of dogs held having never shown any sign of aggression.

Meanwhile dogs can be held for years in almost solitary confinement while cases drag on. Welfare of seized dogs has also caused uproar as more than one hundred dogs have died of illness or unknown reason while in the care of the authorities, while others have been returned cut, bleeding and emaciated.

And Charlotte isn’t all talk and no action. On 24th July Charlotte and Meatball will be joining Anti B.S.L group DDAWatch and members of the public at a Vigil entitled ‘Not Guilty!’ in Richmond Terrace, London. DDAWatch members hope the event will send a strong message to the Government that the current legislation is flawed and must be replaced.

One attendee, Sarah Anderson said “I watched my dogs as they died because I believed I had no choice. They had never hurt anyone and I would never have put them in a position that they felt they would have to. The Vigil will be a time for me to remember my girls and I hope that with Charlottes help, the Government will heed our call and stop punishing the Breed rather than the Deed.”

Charlotte believes now is the time to speak up and protect friendly pet dogs whose only crime is in their appearance.

At 5pm during the vigil Charlotte will accompany representatives of DDAWatch to Downing Street where they will hand in letters from members of the public requesting a repeal of section one of the Dangerous Dogs Act. They will also hand over a scroll in memory of some canine victims of BSL.

Sam died on 26th August 2009. However, his death could easily have been avoided if greater safeguards were in place. His case has highlighted a number of issues relating to seized dogs that must be dealt with to avoid further tragic deaths and a petition has now been set up to help draw attention to these issues.

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MiJJheo1-fA

PLEASE, PLEASE watch the video above.

The petition, hosted on the Care 2 website, asks for an overhaul of procedure in the main by demanding that where a dog is ordered to be destroyed by way of court order, no action will be taken without a written statement from the owners legal team stating no appeal has been nor will be heard.

Furthermore it requests that bodies of dogs that have died due to any cause, while in the care of the authorities are not routinely disposed of. Instead owners must be notified in writing of the dogs death and allowed the option to reclaim their dogs body and any other items such as collars, within 7 days of receipt of the written notice.

Finally that a “cooling off” period of seven days should apply to dogs whose owners have signed over for destruction. This will allow owners time to take legal advice and withdraw their consent for destruction if they so wish.

To sign the petition and help bring about safeguards to protect dogs held in the care of the authorities please

Go: Here –>>

Don't forget about Bruce!!

^^This is Bruce. Another innocent victim of Breed Specific Legislation. Learn his story here.

The new plan claims that other breeds such as the German Shepherd, Rottweiler and Doberman Pinscher should be restricted and forced to be leashed and muzzled in public under provisions within the Order to add breeds or types not currently covered. The same provision to add new breeds or types is also included in the DDA and although Defra claim to have no plans to add breeds or types they do state it is always under review.

Should the recommendation be acted on, the restrictions would bring Northern Ireland more in line with Southern Ireland which already requires the leashing and muzzling of American Pit Bull Terrier, Bull Mastiff, Doberman pinscher, English Bull Terrier, German Shepard (Alsation), Japanese Akita, Japanese Tosa, Rhodesian Ridgeback, Rottweiler, Staffordshire Bull Terrier, and to every dog of the type commonly known as the Ban Dog (or Bandog) and to every other strain or cross of every breed or type of dog described. It will however retain the ban and mandatory destruction in relation to the American Pit bull Terrier, Japanese Tosa, Dogo Argentino and the Fila Brasiliero.

The plan also suggests fines for straying; licensing and identification offences should be significantly increased with the income from such fines being reinvested back into dog control activities by the council.

In order for the recommendation to be acted upon the DDO states “the Department shall consult with such persons or bodies as appear to it to have relevant knowledge or experience, including a body concerned with animal welfare, a body concerned with veterinary science and practice and a body concerned with breeds of dogs.” These are likely to include the Irish Kennel club and the USPCA.

UK based anti BSL group DDA Watch suggest those opposed to the potential adding of breeds or types to any part of the DDO start now to voice their concerns by writing to the relevant parties. For more information or if you would like to use a template letter please email mail@dangerousdogsact.co.uk

Twelve years on and thousands of dogs later….

Today is a special day for anti BSL campaigners within England, Scotland and Wales as 12 years ago our government did something amazing. They held their hands up, said “We made a mistake” and took the first step towards correcting that mistake by amending the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991, a piece of legislation that has cost thousands of innocent lives.

Prior to 8th June 1997 a dog branded “pit bull type” had to be killed regardless of how wonderful and friendly a pet the dog was or how responsible an owner. Any dog fitting the loose description of “type” died by lethal injection. After the 8th June 1997 however the courts were able to use their discretion when sentencing and could allow a dog that posed no danger to the public, to live. The dogs had to be entered onto the Index of Exempted Dogs and owners had to abide by strict restrictions but we no longer had mandatory destruction of dogs based on their physical appearance and the Dangerous Dogs Act (Amendment) 1997 came into force.

For those who stood against the mindless killing of pet dogs this was indeed a triumph, a rare occurrence of the Government admitting it had made a mistake. Sheer hard work, constant pressure and quite literally blood, sweat and tears brought about a change that would save some dogs from death by lethal injection.

I was originally going to write about what has happened since and take a look at what the future may hold but as I was nearly finished a picture came into my mind, a picture that illustrated what some have already been saying, the amendment is NOT enough.

The picture in my mind was of a dog called Oscar.

Oscar is a ghost, a dog that haunts me often. A beautiful red lad with a wonderful family who adored him. Oscar was a “wonky dog” who had been saved by a young lad who himself was very ill. He saw himself in Oscar and took him home as a young pup. Oscar and his new owner kept each other going until one day Oscar was seized. I spoke with Oscar’s family almost daily as they waited to go to court and win him back. They were so excited that he would be coming home but worried about his health problems and the care he would get in kennels. Messages regarding treatment was relayed to the Police and assurance’s it would be done given. Waiting for court was stressful as Oscar’s owner’s condition worsened and as court dates came and went without them, concerns arose.

There’s little point explaining all the ins and outs, you probably already know where it ended. For me the fight for Oscar ended with a phone call. A heartbroken screaming down the phone “they have killed him “. Over and over and over, heart wrenching sobs as the realisation they would never see Oscar, their “wonky dog” again, began to hit home. The police had logged Oscar incorrectly on their computer. He had been destroyed some time previously as a stray dog; his body had been disposed of. Oscar was gone.

We have the amendment but it didn’t save Oscar. We brought in the law, we brought in the amendment and we stopped bothering to change it anymore. Because of this Oscar died.

There are others like Oscar. There’s over a hundred that didn’t go home within the Met police alone recently. Seized and held in “secure kennels” with a “duty of care” to provide for those dogs, to protect them yet they failed. Some of the dogs that die in “police care” may not be “pit bull type” so if your reading this thinking your dog is safe, think again.

There’s hundreds being killed in rescue centres and pounds across the country. We have tried to gather figures on exact numbers killed in London but few seem to have any. We know its at least 100 in London alone over the last year, probably much more.

There are dogs being “identified” by people whose decision is going unchallenged, as owners don’t know where to turn, feel there is no alternative. Those dogs are dying too.

Dogs like Cassie. Her owners knew she wouldn’t cope with being away from her family. They cuddled her weeping as her life ebbed away.

There are dogs like Barney and Missey. Seized and registered but the confines of “secure kennels” has had its affect on them and they are unable to settle back into family life. Barney’s owner rang me after he let Barney go.

“ We never really win do we?” he asked and we don’t. The dogs don’t win and neither does the public. Everybody loses and the dogs are still dying even with the amendment.

These ghosts are a mere drop in the ocean of lost souls. These are some of the ones we know of, some of the ones we hoped to save. For each dog we know of you can be sure another dog at least has also lost its life.
It’s been twelve years since the Government gave limited discretion to the courts allowing some dogs to live. Twelve years since any change was made to the worst piece of legislation this country has known. We are offered our medication to accept this by way of “Leave at home” policies but while we may cheer and pat ourselves on the backs this offers little for the dogs. Do you intend to wait another 12 years before Section one of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 is repealed for good?

Facebook DDA Group

http://ddawatch.webs.com/index.htm

Say No to Breed Specific Legislation

Legislators in the UK have put together a piece of law which will ban previously legal breeds and cross breeds. The bill will, it is promised, see Britain free from dog attacks by ‘the dangerous dog breeds’.

Legislators behind the bill claim it will “eradicate the more dangerous dogs that can inflict injury upon children” and will better protect the public from serious, fatal dog attacks. They go on to set out the grounds of the new bill and exactly which dogs could fall foul of the new legislation.

Any dog weighing in excess of 20kgs.

Any dog in excess of 16” of height to the shoulder.

Dogs carrying liver, black, white or brindle markings.

The bill will not take in to account parentage, breed or DNA profiles. Any dog weighing over 20kgs or taller than 16” to the shoulder could be banned. It is acts regardless of the behaviour exhibited by the dog meaning any dog that fits the criteria above will be in breach of the new bill. Any dog who falls within the above criteria must be neutered, tattooed, chipped and kept on lead and muzzled at all times in public. Owners must also ensure their dog is covered by special third party liability insurance.

The bill also makes it illegal to be in possession of, sell, give away, allow to stray or advertise an un-exempted dog fitting the illegal criteria. Owners in breach of the law will find themselves liable for prosecution, which could lead to a fine, criminal record and up to six months in prison. The dog will also be seized and destroyed.

With the bill finalised the authorities will spend millions of pounds building up teams to enforce the law and ensure dangerous dogs are taken and destroyed. For those who may be affected by the new legislation the following information may be useful.

Still reading?

I’ll bet you are.

The bill I’m talking about is actually the 1991 Dangerous Dogs Act. It’s not new. We’ve had it for a while. And I apologise if it caused you to gulp as a result of the manner in which I presented it.

Your dogs aren’t illegal. Well not most of them anyway. Some of you may have a dog that someone pushes into “pit bull type” and sadly you’re not safe.

But I am willing to bet some people’s hearts were a flutter. Welcome to the world of anyone who owns a dog that *might* catch the attention of an over zealous DDA enforcer who sees a large, shall we say for example, Staffy x Boxer and decides he’d better nab it and get it off the streets ‘just in case’.

If that seems cruel, indiscrimnate and likely to tear people’s lives apart, it’s because it is and it does.

So technically, and make no mistake about this, previously legal (and still legal) breeds and cross breeds ARE being caught up in the vicious ‘pit bull net’.

How cruel it is to tell people their dog’s illegal because it’s a bit tall or a bit heavy. But remember that lump you had in your throat for a moment back then, thinking it might be your dog about to get caught in the DDA dragnet, that’s the daily life for many owners of perfectly legal dogs as they live in fear. Fear about walking their dog. Fear about taking their dog to the vets. Fear every time the door is knocked. And why? For no other reason other than they own a dog which happens to look a certain way.

Good people, just like you, the person reading this, have their dogs removed because it doesn’t look right. You may be a little bit hacked off at me right about now but you know what? Be grateful you got a second chance to own your pet without fear. BSL is similar to cancer. It spreads. If you want to keep a hold of your feeling of security help repeal the law. It’s not your dog today and in all probability it won’t be your dog tomorrow, but someone’s dog is going to be taken and someone else’s dog will lose its life – purely because of how it looks. This can’t go on.

BSL HAS GOT TO GO AND GO NOW!

It’s a bit extreme that sort of talk and sometimes; often in fact, people tell me I am too angry. Well newsflash people, I AM angry. Not TOO angry as I believe no one opposed to cruelty to dogs can ever get too angry (with very rare exceptions) but I am crazy angry at the whole charade surrounding pit bulls and this news article did not help:

For those who didn’t bother to read the link the story is simple. A man has been found guilty of training two dogs for fighting. Two dogs with scarring where found in his back yard. He was charged, found guilty and sentenced.

The Judge is quoted as saying “”Dog fighting is so prevalent in Birmingham I have to make an example of you.”

He then proceeded to hand out 18 DAYS in prison and lifetime ban from owning animals.

All I can say is I bet the guilty party was laughing as he was led from court. All sentences like that will do is allow this god awful “sport” continue as other scum see all they will get is a bit of a telling off! Why not just send him home with a grounding, or no internet for a month? Maybe write a letter saying “I’m sorry for being such an evil S.O.B” I think that would be as much of an “example” as the one dished out by the court.

18 days in prison, he will do half if that. Banned from having animals for life is all very well and good but doesn’t stop him living in a house with dogs, doesn’t stop his wife, mother, brother, lodger having a dog and certainly doesn’t stop him from abusing another dog again. Where is the lengthy prison time, the hefty fine?

This waste of space we call a person will enjoy his three square meals a day, probably play a little pool or x box while he’s inside. The only thing we haven’t done is send him somewhere hot with a nice beach to relax on! Meanwhile someone will inject his dogs with a lethal overdose of anaesthetic and watch them die . They will die after spending probably most of their life fighting to stay alive and the final year in “secure kennels”. They will probably be scared half to death, muzzled, in a strange place with strange people and try to stay awake before dying scared and alone.

Now don’t get me wrong, Im not saying these dog’s must be saved. That’s a whole separate debate. My point is right now these dogs, the abused dogs, the ones we claim to be protecting (good job on that btw!) they pay the real sentence. And it seems to me that the law is stacked against the “good guys”, be they dogs or people.

The dog fighter gets a slapped wrist, his dogs die. However the good owners, those with a good dog that may be a banned type, stand and fight for their dog’s life. They act responsibly and they too can face 6 months in prison, £5000 in fines, a criminal record and months or years of stress and worry while they wait to see if their dog will even survive the time its held in “police care”. One such owner was fined £2500 because she fought for her dog to come home and she wasn’t a dog fighter!

Its time to get real.

The DDA does not work and will not work. Many say it’s a great way of stopping dog fighting by preventing the ownership of those dogs. No, its not. The Animal Welfare Act covers dog fighting if we actually bothered to enforce that properly. The only way to stop dog fighting is to catch the freaks that do it, lock them up and throw away the key. Unless the Courts start taking the matter more seriously the only thing I do know for sure, is dog fighting WILL rise.

All hail this great nation of animal lovers.

Ms Walker made an official complaint following the return of her dog he spent nearly 4 months in secure kennels as a banned “pit bull type”. She was so horrified by the condition of her dog she took pictures showing the cuts to his muzzle, worm infested faeces, sore scrotum and oversized and sore tattoo.

More than one year after the return of her dog and complaining to the RSPCA, Ms Walker received a copy of a memo between the RSPCA and the Met police. The memo was sent from the RSPCA to the Met police but Ms Walker was not told of the outcome until three months AFTER the police had received the memo.

The memo stated that the RSPCA had finished their investigation and found that the complaints of unnecessary suffering are ” unfounded”. Ms Walker is also angry that the memo from the RSPCA she has received states she agreed with this conclusion.

Ms Walker said “Why on earth would I agree the complaints are unfounded when I have been fighting on Kodees behalf for the last 15 months? Kodee came home cut, sore and it should be clear to anyone that this is not acceptable. Had I caused or allowed those injuries I would expect to be charged but it seems to be one rule for dog owners and another for the police and kennels holding our dogs. I am very unhappy and intend to take this further.”

In a bid to prevent similar happening to other dogs Ms Walker made an official complaint to the RSPCA and started a Facebook group “cruelty to dogs in police care” which now has almost 2000 members. Welfare of dogs particularly within the London area has been of grave concern for some time as dogs continue to come home underweight, smelling and with “extreme” tattoos. Freedom of Information requests show that 1-2 dogs are dying from illness on average every week while being held within the Met area.

For the first time, the UK’s most prominent animal welfare organisation has been prepared to publicly support calls for a repeal of section 1 of the Dangerous Dogs Act (DDA) – Section 1 is the part of the legislation which bans dogs based on their breed or type.

Section 1 of the 1991 Dangerous Dogs Act is a highly controversial and widely criticised clause that promotes breed specific legislation. Many experts, law makers and dog lovers from around the UK and globally have seen the devastation caused by breed specific legislation – which outlaws dogs by ‘type’, meaning a dog is deemed ‘dangerous’ and illegal simply based on what it looks like and not because of any offence caused by the dog. As a result of breed specific legislation (BSL) in the UK, many innocent dogs have lost their lives since the law was brought in by Ken Baker in 1991.

Now the RSPCA has set the wheels in motion for other prominent welfare groups to come out and publicly call on the law makers to end section 1 and replace it with fair, effective dog laws which do not condemn dogs to death based on what the look like. The UK can put itself in a position to follow the example set by the Netherlands in repealing section 1 in favour of a law that will place the burden of responsibility on owners rather than terminating the lives of dogs who are guilty of nothing more than looking a certain way.

The move comes about following a productive and engaging meeting between the RSPCA’s Government Relations Manager, Claire Robinson, DDAWatch and the C- fidos at the end of 2008.

The RSPCA public backing for repeal gives anti BSL campaigners the boost they have been waiting for while sending a clear message to the Government that section 1 of the DDA is a failed, unfair concept that needs to be reformed without delay.

DDAWatch – an anti BSL campaign group – has congratulated the RSPCA on the decision to call for action having been previously disheartened to hear many organisations publicly state anti BSL positions but falling short of actually calling for an immediate repeal of section 1.

Alison Green of DDAWatch:

“We are so thrilled to see the RSPCA step up to the plate on such an important issue that has cost the lives of many innocent dogs. For those people who have been actively involved in fighting section 1 cases, for those of us who’ve seen dog owner’s lives ripped apart by this appalling law, which has not protected the public at all, this announcement from the RSPCA will hopefully herald the start of many more calls for repeal and eventually the repeal itself. Now owners and anti BSL campaigners alike have some hope to cling to after so many false dawns. Now we have the opportunity of a lifetime to finally get the Government to see sense. They need to listen to the RSPCA and make the right call. Section 1 has been an unmitigated failure and an animal welfare disaster. It is such a relief to hear the RSPCA being brave and honest enough to publicly call for a repeal where other influential and supposedly anti BSL organisations have fallen short, instead citing ‘political climate’ as a reason to keep BSL.”

Ryan O’Meara, chief executive of C-fidos:

“This is truly great news. It seems such a simple thing to do, to publicly support an end to BSL – especially given that the RSPCA and other major animal welfare organisations have publicly stated their position as being anti BSL – but despite the anti BSL positions held by many organisations and individuals we still have BSL and we have it because we still have section 1 of the DDA. The way to end BSL is to end section 1 and replace it. The RSPCA coming in with public support for the position held by C-fidos and DDAWatch gives legitimacy and momentum to campaigners to call on their government to end BSL. It’s no longer a concept, being anti BSL, it’s a real, tangible opportunity to call the government to account over a highly unfair, unpopular and completely unsuccessful law.”

We pride ourselves on our use of science and maths to work things out. We no longer believe in magic or witchcraft. We don’t offer sacrifices in order to bring good fortune or ward off evil. We no longer think of demonic possession as anything more than a good (or bad) Hollywood film. A black cat can cross our path and the most extreme reaction from us is to stroke it. We have evolved and become the clever things we are today. Or so we, the intelligent species, think.

In reality it seems we have swapped the black cat for the bull breed, as our laws are sure in the belief that to come into contact with one is sure to bring doom and destruction. What’s more is we have gone one step further by not only running from the black cat, but also the black and whites, whites with a black patch and even the pale blues and greys. We even run from the white cat if the lighting isn’t quite right.

The media tell us the “Devil Dog” is alive and well. It’s not guarding the gates of hell and doesn’t have two heads; we haven’t gone quite that far…yet. However, it is allegedly possessed with the spirit of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde as it turns from a sweet loving dog into an uncontrollable killer without any warning or reason. When face to face with the black cat come bull breed we bind it or sacrifice it in order to ward off the evil we are sure it will bring crashing down around us. It seems very much as if we have gone back to old ways of magic, witchcraft and superstition.

The politicians listen to the talk and instead of taking the rational intelligent action based on science and maths, facts and figures; they allow us to lower ourselves to the intelligence of the claims. We throw out the science and the maths. We don’t bother with facts or figures or attempt to apply what we know of canine and human behaviour. Instead we create laws on certain dogs, that aren’t the biggest or the strongest of all dogs, which were never bred to hunt or detain humans, who were actually bred to be extremely people friendly, those dogs are dangerous and to be feared. By way of our actions we offer up the bull breeds as a sacrifice for our failure to use science and maths, our failure to understand, our fear at that lack of understanding and the need to be seen “doing”, so long as “doing” isn’t gathering facts and figures. We offer our sacrifice to ward off the evil. We may as well be holding witch trials.

When I say, “bull breed” I’m not talking about American Pit Bull Terriers or even simply “bull breeds”. I’m talking of any reasonably muscular dog (what is reasonably muscular?), pure or cross bred, recognised breed or undistinguishable mongrel that happens to appear to have the right (or wrong) look to the person stood in front of the dog making that judgement. Put another person in front of the same dog and the judgement might be different depending on whether (as one single point of many) a tail should be straightened or relaxed when at the hock. But the legislation has only been around for nearly 18 years lets not concern ourselves with that little point of interest. The judgement is made based on a particular breed standard – a standard that isn’t used in that form to provide a blueprint for that breed any longer. So we use the standard of an….erm…Its not a breed standard for any recognised breed so I guess it must be a mutt? But if it is a mutt its not just any mutt. Oh no! It’s a mutt that may not look exactly like the standard for that mutt says it should look because we don’t need it to be perfect, just substantially like it.

Are you confused yet? Well keep that to yourself as otherwise we may be seen as having forgotten what “intelligent” means and instead resemble little more than savages killing what they are afraid of.

The same people who scream about the “Devil Dog” possession in the headlines fail to say:

“ A dog that sort of looks like it fits a standard for a breed of dog that we never recognised and isn’t bred to that standard anymore so gosh it could be anything – was seized today in case its figured out how to read and goes about acting out a scene from Jekyll and Hyde”.

If it did, do you think people would think we, the intelligent species had finally cracked? Tell you one thing, if that headline ever comes out ill finally have proof that dogs have evolved better than we have. “Devil dog” isn’t even exclusive to a mutt based on a certain old-unused-standard. We even trot it out for anything black and tan, or any breed that has a fighting background. We quite like to use it when relating to other breeds that may include the words “American” or “Japanese” too. Add a few cross-breeds (starting to sound like a spell now…!) mix the whole shebang up and ladies and gentleman welcome to the future!

A future in which no one in the UK has any reliable figures on what the most common features are in fatal dog attacks because no one bothered to get the figures. During the RSPCA conference this year the fact that no one has any figures was mentioned repeatedly almost as if a reason why the laws cannot be changed. We can bring in a law based on panic, lack of science and figures but we can’t repeal it based on rational thinking, good old-fashioned common sense and the fact that the law failed to do what it set out to do? 18 years of a law which, for a large chuck of those years, has been seen as the unworkable joke of a law and still no one bothered to get any figures. Good going for the most intelligent species that make up this great nation isn’t it?

One thing we do know is in each of the three recent fatalities there has been one overwhelming common factor. Not one of the dogs in question was my definition of “pet” dogs. We have a yard dog brought to protect the property following break in’s. Recently acquired, while the owners appear good intentioned, the dog was left in the yard. This dog killed a very young child while the adults were out of the house.

Then there are guard dogs that seem to have spent time guarding on the roof of a pub. The guard dogs act states a guard dog must be with a handler or secured yet these two dogs managed to get into a room with a small child while its normal handlers where away.

The third was a dog, owned by people involved in crime who alleged to have beaten the dog. They apparently kept the dog away from the child and on the night in question left the dog outside. New years eve with fireworks going off everywhere. The grandmother, stated as having been drinking, took pity on the dog that had bitten before and let him in. He killed her granddaughter.

There are common factors in these cases and breed/type isn’t it. Yet we chose to ignore those factors, blaming that lack of figures we haven’t bothered to get and by doing so can only expect to see more of the same. One other thing each and every one of the families involved has in common is the wish for it never to have happened. If they could have had a magic wand that allowed them to see into the future, see what was going to happen, you can be sure that not one of those fatalities would have happened. But magic does not exist and wishes don’t come true. Science, maths and an understanding of canine and human behaviour do but our lawmakers refuse to apply it so why on earth do we expect the people too?

So there we have it people, this is how far we have travelled down the road of wisdom. We turned the bull breed into a black cat. When the midnight bells ring out heralding the start of 2009 throw salt over your shoulder, salute a magpie, watch out for the cracks in the path, step around the ladder and raise a glass to the future. With such an intelligent species at the helm, who knows what it will bring?