“Why is my dog bred to fight and kill, fighting and killing?”
"It's a problem with the owner and not the dog."
We really need to update or replace the Dangerous Dogs Act, both expanding the banned breeds and giving larger penalties having them.
I was confused why you wrote this about bulldogs at first. As this is what I'm pretty sure all Americans think of bulldogs.
Short cuddley little guys who just love to be couch potatoes and slobber everywhere.
Then I realized this article is talking about pitbulls...never heard them called American xl bulldogs, always just pitbulls.
Learn something everyday.
I'd never heard the term either here in the US.
Apparently a "bully" is a pitbull/bulldog cross, and XL is a larger variety.
Yeah they do not look anything like what I expected them to be, definitely pitbulls and this doesn't surprise me in the least that they killed sheep. They're just dangerous dogs.
Tbf I generally here them referred to as “XL Bullies” rather than bulldog
Because there is demand for it. Ban this breed and the demand does not go away, it will just switch to a new breed that isn't banned as its done before.
The way that they define dog breeds on the list is pretty shit as well, especially when a simple cross breed can circumvent it (have a look at how many pittie crosses can be picked up from dog rehoming centres) and the police don't get involved until the dogs already gone too far.
License the breeders, sell only neutered and chipped dogs unless to another licensed breeders, and make the breeders responsible for the dog to match an agreed healthy standard for the breed with aggressive and unhealthy breeds being bred out of existence.
Sure, there will always be unlicensed breeders but use big fines to enable the RSPCA and vets to actually enforce it. Granted it will take up to 15 years from implementation to really kick in but just adding yet another dog to the list is just not working.
The problem about selling only neutered dogs is that larger breeds (labradors, Newfoundland's, boxers) need to hit maturity before being fixed to ensure proper growth and prevent future health issues. This can be up to 3 years.
Definitely not feasible when a bitch has a litter of 10 puppies that need to be kept for 3 years before being sold to their new homes.
I'm afraid that's an old wives tale, up there with not being able to spay a bitch until after their first period. Its owner preference as there are different health and behavior benefits doing it early or late, or somewhere in the middle.
Personally I would set it at 6 to 12 months, you do not want dogs leaving the mother too young and you need time to spot some of the behavior/health issues.
We have far too many dogs in the UK, just ask any dog rehoming centre, this is in part to massively reduce that problem while improving the health and behaviors of all dogs.
I'd love to see the studies if you have some links. My opinion was formed on a Cochrane analysis of several longitudinal studies for cancer specifically in bitches by breed, so anything I can add to my research would be appreciated.
Cochrane analysis of several longitudinal studies for cancer specifically in bitches by breed
Since you already have a few, why don't you go first, as its you that is making that claim to be an expert in this field. I am sure you have plenty of them if this is the case? Zero point me linking you to your own papers.
I outlined that many vets and associations relying on vets suggest its a trade off depending on what age you do neuter or if you do at all, rather than a blanket 3 year or not all approach that you suggested, implying that its the only option.
You must have misread, I'm no expert - just a biologist who tried to make an educated decision on when to spay my lab. Happy to cite sources though - looking again, the study I found most robust is longitudinal rather than Cochrane but had a very large data set which was my interest.
This for example helped me to decide to leave my spay until after 11 months.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7359819/
Feel free to share yours, it's been a couple of years since I dug through research pieces, sharing information and forming educated opinions is key for good science.
A £900 fine? He didn't even have to compensate the farmer?
Fines are different than restitution
(22 + 48) * 250 = £17500 ($22,091) is roughly the cost of the sheep, that's not calculating time/food cost put into the flock already, some were pregnant. Likely a total loss for the farmer, dog owner is a scumbag, ban bully breeds IMO.
The article states £14000
Generally those kind of valuations are calculated on cost of 1:1 replacement.
I wonder if thats more of an insurance thing? Like the farmer would claim and the insurance company goes after the dog owner for the money
And then farmer gets stiffed with increased insurance premiums. I really hope that's not how it works.
Hopefully the farmer can directly sue the owner for actual and emotional damages with Farm insurance covering the legal costs.
I know it's not really related to this news, but there's a family at school who bring their XL down to the school gates at pickup and dropoff and every single time I see it I worry what it could do to the kids if it ever decided to go off. The dog owner wouldn't stand a chance, it's built like a [sturdy outdoor toilet made of bricks] and would probably just drag her along.
Unless he gets compensation (this year, not £10 a week), this farmer could well go out of business. There need to be serious change in the licensing and enforcing.
Imagine those two dogs in a school playground.
Hughes needs to be banned from ever having a dog, 10 years jail and every thing he owns (and future wages/benefits garnished if necessary) sold to compensate for the loss of this farmer's livelihood.
General community for news/discussion in the UK.
Less serious posts should go in !casualuk@feddit.uk or !andfinally@feddit.uk
More serious politics should go in !uk_politics@feddit.uk.
Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.
Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.
Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.
If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.
Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.
Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.
