It is a sad fact that children under five are the demographic group most likely to be on the receiving end of a dog bite. Perhaps even sadder – and certainly more frustrating – is that such attacks are often caused by a family member’s pet rather than a strange dog. But how can such incidents be prevented? How can parents spot the warning signs and teach their offspring the correct manner in which to behave around dogs? The brand new title from ethical animal publishers Hubble & Hattie, Babies, Kids and Dogs, attempts to address these concerns and offers practical advice regarding dog behaviour and training with an emphasis on ensuring that the family pet remains exactly that – an animal to be respected, loved and enjoyed by all members of the family, young and old.
Authors Melissa Fallon and Vickie Davenport both have degrees in animal behaviour and a wealth of experience in dog training, alongside being parents themselves. With a foreword from Steve Mann, the founder of the Institute of Modern Dog Trainers (IMDT), the book immediately promises to be a useful tool for all dog owners, with or without young children. In less than 100 pages, the authors manage to cram in a heap of information, including everything from the potential causes of dog bites and how to spot stress signals, to a breakdown of training exercises to work on prior to the arrival of a baby.
The layout of the book is arranged so that the majority of text is broken up by a variety of full colour photographs, making for easy reading. In the case of the explanation of training exercises, the images complement the text nicely by offering an insight into how the tasks should be performed. Subheadings, such as ‘Potential problem behaviours/scenarios’ and ‘Respecting your dog’s food/resources’, are organised into five chapters – Assessing your dog, Preparation, Introducing the new family member, Toddler training and Raising children around dogs. One small criticism is that the first chapter contains quite a wide scope of information which deviates from its description of ‘Assessing your dog’ – perhaps the majority of this chapter would have been better suited to an extension of the introduction – and the page which details how to manage a reactive dog on the lead would have been better suited to the ‘Building confidence’ section instead. Despite this, the assessment chart itself offers an excellent starting point for identifying any areas which may trigger behavioural problems by incorporating a traffic light system to mark how well the dog appears to cope with stimuli, such as the presence of children and baby-related items. Tasks such as on-lead walking and the ability to give up toys are also included in the chart, which is further organised into ‘The Six Essentials’:
- Build confidence
- Walks/ exercise
- Flexible routine/energy
- Avoiding temper tantrums
- To chew or not to chew
- Establish boundaries
An interesting part of the book is the inclusion of ‘Charlie and Champ’ illustrations by artist Natasha Thompson, designed to encourage discussion about safe dog interaction with your child (see example ‘How do we know Champ is unhappy?’ below). Most notably is the image of ‘Charlie’ hugging the dog – the so-called cute photographs widely seen across the internet of toddlers climbing on uncomfortable dogs recreated in cartoon form. While preventing children from teasing the family pet or pulling their tail is (hopefully) obvious, unfortunately many dog owners are oblivious when it comes to recognising the signs of stress or attempts at avoidance behaviour, making the more subtle body language that ‘Champ’ demonstrates a vital lesson for parents too.
Overall, Babies, Kids and Dogs offers an excellent insight into dog behaviour in relation to life with children. Its accessible format, with a successful balance between theory and practical training advice, makes the book a valuable resource which should be on the bookshelves of all parents and dog owners. It would not be unrealistic to say that this publication has the capability to educate the public and therefore have an impact on the reduction of instances of dog bites on children.
‘Babies, Kids and Dogs’ (Hubble & Hattie, September 2016) can be purchased directly from the publishers here.
I recently wrote a piece for anti Breed Specific Legislation (BSL) campaign group Born Innocent about the flawed Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 which can be viewed here.
Today marks 25 years since the Dangerous Dogs Act came into force, introducing breed specific legislation to the UK for the first time. Since August 1991, thousands of dogs have been seized and often euthanised under ‘Section 1’ of the Act which prohibits four types of dog, originally chosen due to their size and fighting heritage. The most common of the types, the Pit Bull Terrier, is a much maligned and misunderstood breed. As a result of Section 1 of the Dangerous Dogs Act, dogs which share the characteristics of a ‘Pit Bull’ can not be rehomed, even if they have passed temperament tests conducted by qualified dog behaviourists. Those who already own a dog which is deemed to be ‘of type’ have to attend court in order to have their dog exempted by law, a lengthy process which often goes on for months, during which time their pet is held in secure kennels – an unfamiliar environment, often without daily exercise. Some of these dogs never return home.
Yet despite all of this, dog attacks are still on the rise in the UK. The Dangerous Dogs Act is a failed piece of legislation which has caused untold misery to so many dog owners and those who have the task of enforcing the law and dealing with its effects. Following the recent reports into the failings of breed specific legislation from both Battersea Dogs and Cats Home and the RSPCA, I caught up with Born Innocent, a campaign group working for a full reform of the Dangerous Dogs Act. The group’s work and anti-breed specific legislation message has recently been openly supported by TV dog trainer Victoria Stilwell. Here’s what they had to say…
Hi, Born Innocent! Can you tell us about your organisation and who is involved?
We are a non-profit campaigning group seeking to introduce a scientific-based, breed neutral strategic approach to dog legislation, with a focus on preventative measures. Born Innocent is formed of a committee of six professionals, all with wide experience in dog rescue, animal welfare, campaigning and political lobbying. Our Chair, Ms Frannie Santos-Mawdsley, is a senior international marketer, with a 20 year career in data and insight analysis. Our Advisory Committee is led by Shakira Miles, CEVA’s Veterinary Nurse of the Year 2016, and is counselled by veterinary professionals, trained behaviourists and scholars. Alongside Ms Miles we have Marie Yates, a writer and social entrepreneur who loves dogs. Marie is the co-founder and director of Canine Perspective CIC, a social enterprise using force-free dog training to make a positive change to the lives of humans and rescue dogs. We are also fortunate to have Professor John Cooper QC as our patron.
What was the inspiration behind your logo, ‘Purple Patch’?
We wanted our identity to feel professional while at the same time being welcoming and inclusive. The inspiration for Purple Patch has three elements:
- Purple is a colour associated with responsibility: we promote responsible dog ownership.
- ‘Patch’: Section 1 of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 is a patchy piece of legislation that we can no longer ignore.
- The figure of a dog reaching out for assistance with his paw. Hopefully this speaks for itself!
These three elements combined, in the design of the logo, are the embodiment of Purple Patch.
Which areas of the Dangerous Dogs Act will Born Innocent be focusing on?
Our vision is the introduction of breed neutral legislation in the UK, with a supportive framework that fosters education, responsible ownership and bite prevention backed by scientific research. Hence, our focus is on a reform of the full current legislation.
Many animal welfare charities and other organisations such as the Kennel Club have previously spoken out against breed specific legislation. Why do you think that we have not yet seen any proposals to remove BSL from the Dangerous Dogs Act, despite evidence that it does not have any effect on the reduction of dog bite cases?
Whilst many leading organisations such as the Kennel Club have spoken against BSL, this is not their single area of focus. There has long been a misconception amongst the public (including politicians) of what breed specific legislation is, what it does and what it does not do! Often, the language used by the media and government is surrounded in jargon and folklore. On top of that, many organisations have focused on separate pieces of legislation and evidence, while still dealing with the ‘now’ (e.g. supporting owners or stray dogs).
What we are doing at Born Innocent that is different is bringing scientific, legal, financial, human, animal and societal considerations together in order to look at the full picture of how legislation affects our society.
Lately there has been a lot of publicity surrounding the Dangerous Dogs Act, following the seizure of Hank in Northern Ireland. Do you think that this has raised awareness of breed specific legislation amongst the general public?
Hopefully it is starting to make a difference. However, while we are still seeing certain breeds demonised by the press, we need to ensure that education and changing the dialogue around dog bite prevention remains at the centre of public debate.
If someone has had their dog seized as a suspected Section 1 ‘type’, what support is available for them?
There are support groups that can be found on social media, especially Facebook. It would be unfair to name one over another, but excellent daily case support is available. We often get messages and emails, and we will direct individuals to the most appropriate support for them, since Born Innocent focuses on campaigning. Most importantly is that the owner’s basic rights as a UK citizen are understood. You do not have to agree that you are guilty (because owning a suspected breed banned under Section 1 is a crime), nor to sign your dog over to the police to be euthanised. We believe that having an independent, court verified assessor who has had no previous links with the police is essential for impartial advice on whether the dog fits ‘type’ or not. Finally, there are many excellent solicitors who specialise in canine and animal law. Our legal advisors are Parry, Welch & Lacy who successfully handle complicated cases and, like us, believe in questioning type first and foremost before approaching the exemption route.
What would Born Innocent like to see as a replacement for the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 in its current form?
We would like to see a breed neutral legislation that focuses on the owners’ responsibility rather than a dog’s guilt. The last 25 years have taught us that focusing on breeds does not diminish bites. Looking at successful communities around the world, the positive results are in those where education comes first, supported by animal neutering and health programmes, together with increasing fines which are livelihood proportionate. Moreover, the police and Government are currently not focusing enough resources on a serious matter which is often linked to breed specific legislation – dog fighting. We would like to see the label “dog bred for fighting” removed from legislation, because the guilt is then placed on the dog. The case of the dogs saved from Mike Vick’s fighting ring in the US clearly demonstrates that even dogs previously involved in fighting can be rehabilitated. Hence, we need a piece of legislation that focuses on education, prevention and punishing people who are guilty, such as irresponsible and cruel handlers.
How does Born Innocent intend to lobby for change?
We conduct both empirical and desk research in various areas affected by the law, such as animal welfare, human rights, bite prevention, legal execution and husbandry and better ownership education, amongst others. We use our data-based findings in lobbying Parliament and the House of Lords, together with its subsidiary groups and legal advisors.
What’s the best way for supporters to get involved with your campaigns?
Our current key campaign is to lobby the Law Society on the review that they are conducting of unfair and discriminatory laws, by 31/10/16. We want them to advise the Government to scrap the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991, as it is, according to many lawyers and barristers, “one of the worst pieces of law in the UK”.
We also encourage everyone to write to their own MP and to DEFRA. We have tips on letter writing which can be viewed on our website.
We update all of our social media daily. Visit our website at www.borninnocent.co.uk
Follow us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/borninnocentdda/
Follow us on Twitter and Instagram at @borninnocentdda
The Pug is one of the oldest surviving dog breeds, thought to have originated in China around 700 BC, although records suggest that dogs of a similar appearance to the breed we know today existed as early as 500 BC. Queen Victoria loved pugs and played a significant role in establishing the breed in Europe, placing the little wrinkled dogs firmly in the hearts of Victorian dog enthusiasts. Pugs belonging to royalty were treated as such and would be seen riding at the front of the carriage in clothes matching those of their masters.
However, not everyone shared the Queen’s passion for pugs. The author Taplin wrote that they were “applicable to no sport” and “appropriated to no useful purpose”. The name ‘pug’ itself was defined as a nickname for ‘monkey’ in the 1700s, a time when keeping marmosets as pets was not uncommon. Although it is still perfectly legal to own a primate in the UK, our now extensive knowledge and understanding of animal welfare means that our attitude towards animals has changed dramatically. With the obvious implications of keeping such an animal in the unsuitable, alien environment that is our homes, most of us wouldn’t think twice about owning a monkey. So why are pugs, one of the unhealthiest dog breeds, still as popular as they were under Queen Victoria’s rule?
It is not difficult to answer this question. Pug faces adorn endless lines of cushions, bags, T-shirts, pyjamas, onesies and phone cases. The pug craze is highlighted in the media, with photographs of various celebrities holding their pets splashed across newspapers. On the internet, sites such as tumblr’s ‘Pugs in Clothes’ support the attitude that it is acceptable to treat pugs as an accessory rather than a living, (just about) breathing creature. Pugs are cute, and the current trend and apparent necessity for all things pug is a far cry from the days when the breed could only be owned by emperors, with illegal ownership punishable by death!
A pug in a Starbucks outfit taken from the site ‘Pugs Dressed as Things’.
Instead of addressing the health issues within the breed, such as the obvious breathing difficulties and proptosis (a medical emergency involving the eye popping out of its socket, usually caused by holding the neck too tightly but can also be the result of play), unscrupulous breeders continue to produce litter after litter of pugs. Breeding dogs in order to meet public demand is nothing new; following the release of the 101 Dalmatians movie in 1996, people with little knowledge of the high-energy and often demanding breed were able to ‘cash in’ on the Dalmatian’s popularity, with many dogs unsuitable for life as a family pet produced as a result. Sites such as Pets for Homes and Gumtree are an ideal outlet for such breeders, making it easier than ever for anyone to purchase an animal without any real consideration. Indeed, if live meerkats were as readily available as their fluffy toy counterparts, it is likely that we would be overrun with them too.
If pugs are ‘on trend’ in the eyes of the public, it is true that Staffordshire Bull Terriers and other such breeds are also ‘fashionable’ amongst certain members of society. You only have to look at the music charts and there is the artist ‘Pitbull’, who chose his stage name based solely upon the breed’s notoriety. If Labradors were to become the ‘devil dogs’ of 2014, would we suddenly see an increase in youths parading down the street and lurking on street corners with ‘Marley’? It is true that breeds such as the Akita and Dogue De Bordeaux have seen an increase in popularity in the last few years, while the German Shepherd and Rottweiler, once favourite targets for the media’s dangerous dog campaigns in the 80s and 90s, have appeared to return to more responsible owners.
If gang members require a dog that will intimidate others, it has to be a breed that has the ability to strike fear into the hearts of the public – one that they have seen in the news. Would they be less inclined to choose the Akita, complete with its fluffy coat and curly tail, for use as a status dog without attacks featuring the breed shown in the media?
Just as pugs are widely available, Staffordshire Bull Terriers and Staffie crosses can be found in every classified ad section and are often sold via a ‘mate of a mate’, and, in comparison to other breeds mentioned, are usually highly affordable. Those who want a dog bred for aggressive tendencies are unlikely to approach a Kennel Club registered breeder, and they have no reason to do so. Statistics shown in the February 2014 issue of Your Dog magazine show that Staffordshire Bull Terriers are the most stolen dog breed in Britain, and many pet charities are currently working to raise awareness of the dangers of leaving a dog tied up outside a shop. From a financial perspective, there is no point in producing dogs that nobody wants, and with these statistics proving exactly what sort of people are after a Stafford, the market for ‘weapon dogs’ is as large as ever. Unfortunately it is always the dog that pays the price for becoming either ‘useless’ or unfashionable, a statement that any rescue centre full of poorly-socialised and neglected Staffords would support.
Until the image of the Stafford is changed, the future for the breed remains the same. The great work of the East Anglian Staffordshire Bull Terrier Display Team, who perform in the main arena at Crufts, is just one example of how media stories can be weakened and opinions changed by showing a breed in a positive light.
As for the Pug, it is likely that in a year or so the novelty items embellished with a pug face will be met with the same exasperated sighs that the once admirable and now arguably overused ‘Keep Calm and Carry On’ merchandise generates. In an ideal world, Staffords would become the new pug and, instead of an increase in breeding, the thousands in rescue would be adopted as a result.
At least Staffords can be played with without the risk of proptosis.