Animal 24/7

ladyt25

ladyt25

Well-Known Member
Joined
30 November 2007
Messages
7,792
Location
Leeds
Visit site
Why is it this and similar programmes make me soo mad! Just watched tonight's episode (yeah it's probably some ancient repeat) but all i think when it's on is "yeah right, like the RSPCA wlould bother going out to that". Tonight though it's made me very angry.

RSPCA offlicers go to house where emaciated bitch and her 5 or so puppies have been left, they 'rescue' the lot of them but as they suspect they are pit bulls they take the bitch (who is wagging, friendly and just relieved to be 'saved' i imagine) to the vet. At the end of the programme the presenter says how they were found to be pit bulls (banned dog breed) so they were PTS! Sorry, this just makes me mad. Yes I know the intention of these dogs was probably for fighting but why can't they just neuter and rehome? The bitch was no more aggressive than any other dog and the pups, well they've not even started in life.

Sorry i just don't get it, why is it the dogs have to suffer? They don't know they're banned do they, there's no reason why they're more aggressive than any other dog so why can't the RSPCA actually do something to help? They say they're banned unless you have a special licence so why couldn't they look at rehoming them to people who DO have said licence or issue a new, responsible owner with a licence.

Sorry i just don't get it, the more programmes i see where the RSPCA 'rescue' pets etc only to have them PTS shortly afterwards just makes me angry.

Ok - rant over!!!
 
Yep, saw the tail end of it as well, just came in from walking my dogs, and wanted to go back outside and give them a massive hug.
What a sweet little bitch she was :(

In fairness to the RSPCA, and I have not a lot of time for them, they, and councils, are bound by the law - it is the law that is the problem.
 
I saw that, I agree the bitch was a sweetie, didn't seem to have an aggressive bone in her body. More likely a staffie cross too, didn't have a pit bull head imho. However, suspect she would be very hard to rehome just because of her "type", and better a quick peaceful end than months stuck in kennels.
 
I know the law's the problem and ultimately people who train them to be fighting dogs are to blame, it just makes me very sad that perfectly nice dogs have their lives ended through no fault of their own. It's very unfair.
 
ladyt25 said:
I know the law's the problem and ultimately people who train them to be fighting dogs are to blame, it just makes me very sad that perfectly nice dogs have their lives ended through no fault of their own. It's very unfair.
Click to expand...

The law is not great - but that's not the fault of the RSPCA.

At least this way the bitch and pups died peacefully, rather than ending their lives in dog fights:( The fault lies with their breeders, not the RSPCA.
 
I guess they don't have any choice but to PTS, but it does seem like such a shame, mama dog seemed such a sweetie considering the police were kicking in the door in. I didn't like how they were always referred to as "fighting dogs" rather than just saying a "banned breed".
 
I'm no expert but she looked like she couldn't fight her way out of a paper bag - dogs aren't always good at what they are bred for.

I have two showline dogs who's father was a very good working dog. They're neither of them show quality and one won't work and the other only works well in a couple of disciplines.
There's a bitch for sale on a website I frequent, Czech bred, imported, according to her lines she should be a high-drive, multi-titled working dog by now, but she doesn't have it in her, she's not interested.

How many failed gundogs are there? Failed racing dogs? Failed sheep dogs, despite years of breeding for certain traits.
But I suppose the relevant organisations are too snowed under to deal with and rehab dogs like her on a case-by-case basis :(
 
As far as I am aware, under the DDA you aren't allowed to sell or (I think) rehome a section 1 dog. The exemption which allows some to be kept with insurance, muzzling, no off-lead time in public etc was meant for dogs that were alive before the Act came into force.

TBH, it's only my opinion, but I don't think the exempted dogs get any kind of life anyway with the restrictions. You can even be prosecuted if you take the dogs muzzle off to save it from choking if it vomits! I would rather put a dog down than give it that kind of half life, personally.
 
No, you're right.

We've discussed this before, if you're found with a dog fitting the description here, dog is impounded and you're usually asked to sign it over upon assessment, if you challenge the council, you're taken to court and the judgement is 9/10 that the dog is destroyed.
I may be wrong but I, like you, always thought the exemption was for dogs born before the ban and they envisioned that the breed(s) would die out.
They've had a couple of 'amnesties' here.
 
I just don't think the laws are often thought through enough, it's like a panic law/ban whereas I think these things should be judged on a case by case basis. if said dog was a fighting dog and that was all it had ever known then yes sadly there is unlikely to be any chance it is going to be suitable to rehabilitate enough to rehome.

However, a dog that clearly is not aggressive or does't show any aggression could be assessed and considered as possible to rehome? I think it's a shame the dog act is so black and white in that respect. Maybe I am just too soft. I just get mad really that ultimately the dogs pays the price not the horrid people who breed them for illegal means.
 
The DDA is a famous piece of bad legislation, rushed through as a knee-jerk reaction to a series of dog attacks in the early 90s. It's regularly cited on courses, in books, and by lobbyists and politicians as being something we don't want another one of! At first, it called for ALL section 1 dogs (the banned breeds) to be PTS, then after an outcry when several family pets that hadn't actually done anything wrong were confiscated and pts, it was amended to allow the exemption, with the idea being that the breeds would eventually die out naturally as no breeding was allowed.

Of course in practice it has not done what it was meant to, as other breeds have simply taken the place of banned breeds as 'status dogs', it has been devillishly hard to enforce, and it has led to the current problem with Staffies:(

My personal view is that a licensing scheme would be better, but that also has its problems and it is not a perfect solution by any means.
 
You know over the years ..boarding and grooming dogs as well as breeding my bull terriers..I KNOW the law is an ass. What tried to bite most? Yorkies,chi`s,cockers and golden retrievers.NOW I know these were the baddies of their breed,so don`t condemn them all,of course.What is frankly funny ,grooming an irate spoiled yorkie, would def not be if it were a Rottie.My dream dog to own..not allowed due to our ridiculous laws ..would be a blue Amstaff,known as dependable types of guys in their native land and stunning.As it is papers like the Daily Express are going for a ban on several so far unlisted breeds. That RSPCA programme was on before ..*******s..it just made me want to airlift the sweet little girl to somewhere more sensible like Eire. Law?How about common sense.I can also remember when a pit did "attack" a little girl .."but was tempted away with chocolate".Now THAT just does`nt happen if a bully is really attacking anyone, I do know the breed well.Of course it was awful that the little one was bitten at all..but as usual WHY did the owner have the dog loose and out of control??

Too many daft laws and way too little commonsense
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top