What are we supposed to be looking at? If the SSPCA have looked into it then provide a link with their statement on this matter. Why come on here as a new person throwing a paddy because you don't like what's been said? Everyone is entitled to an opinion.
Becky

What has people selling their pets got to do with this dog that people believe isn't getting the care and attention it deserves?

Also, why should people apologise?
perhaps the SSPCA should release a statement with pictures.

People can only believe what they see....

Hi Hevvur,

I'm sure plenty of dogs do adapt. Without wanting to be rude, if you read the statement, it's clear the vet - and the inspector for that matter - consider THIS dog to be entirely unsuitable for rehoming. I don't think that applies to every dog that's ever lived outdoors.

I think they're positive the dog would actually suffer more if it was taken into someone's home. Otherwise, why on earth wouldn't they do so.

It staggers me why some people think charities as proven as the Scottish SPCA wouldn't act in the best interests of an animal.

It says at the bottom of the statement they looked after almost 13,000 animals last year!!!!!

No I never did complain coz I was too busy venting my fury on this thread, and didn't see the point. I just need to know that this dog is not in the appalling conditions and welfare that we are led to believe on this thread, so can you convince me of that please???? As you will see from my posts, I just couldn't believe, that in this day and age this would be allowed to continue with animal welfare charities involved, not in the UK anyway, abroad yes, but not here, thank God.

Hi Mahooli,

sorry, that was meant to be a link to the Scottish SPCA statement. Instead it was another link I was looking at with these awfully untrue allegations.

Link

So why can't the dog live outside at the owners house?
Where it has human contact when it needs it. Not when someone can get to where it lives *ALONE*.

Why can't the owner provide a nice kennel, with a nice large run - not a scrap yard.

Unfortunately, many animal charities don't always act in the best interests of animals.

As I said - people can only believe what they see, and if the SSPCA don't provide pictures to try and show people that the linked website isn't true....what else can they believe.

I work with rescue dogs, and one group of dogs has recently been in the news - apparently the owner cared for them, and the RSPCA said she cared for them well. Don't they work in the best interest of animals?
I know for a FACT she didn't care for her pets.

Imm confussed on what iv been told?

I can understand why you're confused MBll but I think the Scottish SPCA statement makes things clear - they received a complaint, they acted according to vet advice and the law, they'll continue to visit the dog.

As for pictures, I'm quite sure charities/companies etc can't just go posting pictures of people's proprty without their permission.

Also, if this guy isn't committing an offence - and clearly he isn't - why should he have photos of his property put on public view just because someone made false statements about a charity.

I didn't email the SSPCA due to my feeling that I had no conclusive evidence that these were up to date photos and that the SSPCA hadn't done anything. I felt I simply couldn't go on what one website said.

However, although I don't necessarily agree with everything said, I appreciate that the authorities have a hard time doing much about things like this due to there always being someone above them making the rules.

I don't fully agree with their conclusions but I'm glad that they have been out to examine him and found him in good health.

There are plenty of dogs that live in the house and get no attention at all, or in the garden at home and don't get taken inside/walks so if this man really does visit him for lengthy periods each day and feed him a well balanced diet, I don't feel that what he's doing is far worse than some other owners.

I personally wouldn't choose to treat a dog this way, but if what the SSPCA say is true and the owner is now better informed on how to look after CD, then I can't complain.

Put it this way, if the dog is mentally and physically stimulated everyday but lives outside as it has done all his life, and after a visit from the SSPCA, the owner has taken on board what has been said, I would say this dog is a lot better off than the pampered, overfed chocolate labrador that lives indoors with his owners around him.

Dogs are pets, unless they live out in the wild and have a pack for company, we made it that way - end of! This poor s*d is being asked to do something totally unnatural and it sickens me. Even guard dogs I thought had to be under the care of a handler, so how come this dog is allowed to live like this on his own even if he is being fed twice a day? I don't think it should be allowed, and I don't even think it's quite legal???

I'm out of here now coz it's too upsetting for me to think about this poor dog anymore, Ive got enough problems of my own and little ole me can't do anything to change his situation anyways. Hopefully somebody can!