Banned breeds

Following on from a previous thread. The concensus was banning a breed made them more attractive. My point was WHY DO WE NEED TO BRING FURTHER BREEDS OVER HERE?

The dogs in question were the Tosa and Dogo - both large guarding breeds.

There is very little policing of dogs at the moment and bringing in further breeds to my mind would make the situation worse. At least if they are banned it would make it so much harder.

Recently I read about Ovcharkas being bred over here and everyone saying "they must have one" "gorgeous big bears". Have any of these people the least idea on how to look after or handle one of these dogs?

I sort of agree and sort of don't.

Basically I don't think bringing in new breeds increases the demand from 'undesirable' owners for dogs overall - I think the demanded is simply switched from one 'in' breed to another.
So I'm not sure that a new breed would make the problem greater, I think it would just spread it across more breeds.

hi
it is a difficult one,but i stand by 'deed not breed' there are always going to be numptys

i have a csv,i longed for one... a few years ago people were 'up in arms' about them,but they had never met any.
imo banning whole breeds is not the way forward.

My question still stands - Why do we need anymore new breeds?

I agree deed not breed but you can't get away from the "numpty" factor. More breeds = more dogs in rescue when they find they can't control them or they are not what they expected.

CSV?

I don't think there is a need persay, but the banned breeds have not had the desired effects, reducing dog attacks/dog biting numbers.
You can give a numpty a pomeranian they can turn them into undesirable dogs with bad habits.
There are other dogs that have taken their place that are turning into the new dogs that are "needed' to be banned. Rather than punishing the ones responsible for making a dog 'dangerous'.
There are large breeds that you can still train them and make them into those banned breeds.
There is responsiblity to owning a large, medium and small breed of dog if that is neglected then those banned breeds being out of the picture just changes the name of the name of the next dog that needs to be banned.

we dont is the answer to your question. but that does not make banning breeds right or fair.

CSV is a czech wolf dog.

I have a friend with Central Asian Ovcharkas that are absolutely fine, in fact very much like my Estrelas in temperament. Estrelas have only been over here for 30 years, Anatolians, Maremmas, Tibetan Mastiffs etc. are all guarding breeds which are established in the UK and don't cause any trouble. Why? Because they are being responsibly bred and new owners are being vetted. More breeds does not equal more dogs in rescue. Banning breeds has brought the Staffordshire Bull Terrier to crisis point with far too many being bred and pts each day. The 'hard dog' was once the GSD, then the Dobermann, the Rottweiler, now it's anything the law says you cannot own. And yet people still manage to own them. It's not working. The best thing the government could do would be to change the DDA so it doesn't mention specific breeds.

If you notice, the pit bull fatalities seem to occur in houses where drug abuse and dealing is going on. Maybe cracking down on drugs, gangs etc. would have a knock on effect. I have customers who have pit type dogs, they look hard, the dogs wear leather, spikes and chains. They are also some of the best loved and trained dogs I see. I'd pet them before I'd touch most of the toy breeds that come in.

When will people stop judging others by what dogs they prefer?

probably never. i had a lil cousin cryin becuase she wanted to play with Bruce but my aunty wouldnt let her becuase she can tell by looking him he is agressive and not fit for family life.

Yet my lil bro and sis were playing with him at the time as they always do

I agree with you whole heartedly. While I am not in favour of poor legislation of any sort, nor am I a fan of governments telling us what we can and cannot do, when it comes to animals I can see no reason to make freely available any more difficult breeds; in the case you are discussing these are fighting dogs which is why the ban (though technically you can own them with restriction, so not even a ban- correct me if I am wrong here).

If the dog is not allowed then the argument for welfare is hypothetical; no dogs, no pups born therefore no welfare issues. Make them freely available then we have some good owners and some bad owners (and yes I know it applies to all breeds); the bad owners create welfare issues for their animals and their children or other peoples children- read the press.

There seems to be some misguided idea that there is no genetic component to dog aggression and that an aggressive dog brought up right will be peaceful and loving and ignore its instinct- people should get real: and by the way what happens if the owners have good intentions but don't train the dog? Or they don't have good intentions?

Blaming the 'deed not the breed' is all well and good but we then wait for the deed to happen; perhaps an infant killed, and then we can apportion blame.

Your CSV was never banned under the dangerous dogs act. They could be owned, un-neutred with a DWA licence. But they have now been recently banned in Norway. I have never heard of a fatal attack by one though.