Chester progress update

We have received another update on Chester, who is being rehabilitated by Jo Cottrell of DogTrouble.co.uk.

"He's been living with the pack now and has not shown any signs of aggression. He would be suited to a dog of low to medium energy that does not show signs of dominance."

It shows what you find when an expert gets involved. We always considered Chester could never be rehomed with another dog, but Jo has shown that the opposite is the case, and that he would flourish in a home with another calm dog.

Cesar Milan

I have had an on/off admiration for Cesar Milan.

At first, when I saw his earlier shows several years ago I was in naive awe at what he was able to achieve.

Then, the doubt set in. Mutterings and rumours on the internet about using force, and what many considered out-dated methods of training. Then there was incident that led to a legal case and a settlement out of court (never a good sign).

Then I came back to the show, and watched it again and took a different view, not least in his attitude to rescue dogs, banned breeds and puppy farms.

I also have to think about the same people who criticise his methods as often being the same people who perform curiously simple short tests to define if a dog is aggressive, and therefore should live. This was demonstrated graphically in a recent BBC Panorama episode. Here a leading dog welfare organisation decided that because a dog pulled on a lead, and maybe growled (it was inaudible to me) it was dog-aggressive and because of this, and the pressing numbers in their care it could not be kept for rehoming, but destroyed instead. I was horrified.

Cesar Milan would not accept that. Then again the comparison is by default unfair, because Cesar does not have 3,000+ dogs to deal with every year, but his attitude is that no dog is beyond help, even if it means the owners may need to change.

So, is Cesar cruel? Is it cruel to use a choke chain on a strong dominant dog? Well he very rarely uses one. He has developed his own collar that is, from what I can see, a development of the choke principle, but in a slightly different way. More often, for dogs that pull and are intent on taking their owners wherever they please he uses a rope collar (choke principle still applies) and lifts it as high as it can go under the head of the dog. This does work, instantly in controlling the movement of the dog. I have tried it myself. But the trick is to know when to do it, and when to stop doing it. If the lead is held incorrectly the dog will still pull, and the position of the collar could cause considerable suffering even injury. That is why Cesar could cause problems for viewers who attempt these techniques without actually knowing what they're doing.

Cesar has used the body flip, roll and pin to dominate aggressive dogs. For this he has been criticised. Yet I did not see the criticism levied at the BBC when on its Dog Borstal Mick did exactly the same thing. I admire Mick, and I like his style and feel his use of the flip and pin was necessary to establish first dominance, then submission and finally trust in the dog. It worked.

Then there is the back-heel. In the legal case mentioned above it was insinuated that this may have been used to such a degree that the dog in question had bruising in the thigh area. From what I see, Cesar uses a tap of the heel, more a touch and certainly not a kick. I do not like this form of physical technique, but it can work. With my Bo, who can be dog aggressive to strangers the tap on the back leg instantly clicks him out of the prey instinct. However, I choose to avoid those contacts in the first place rather than stress/excite him to the point that I would have to issue some a 'touch'.

The other 'touch' is what he calls the bite or nip, and what I call the claw, as that is what the hand looks like. I can concerned that this technique is not sufficiently explained for ordinary owners to understand. It works part of the time for Cesar, but I think only in those nervous excitable cases where the 'touch' snaps the dog from the mentality of the problem. I have tried the 'claw' and find it marginally effective. For Dolly it has no effect, but she is more confident. I have not needed to use it on Bo. For the old boy Jasper it instantly snaps him out of any barking frenzy, but that I feel is more to do with his nervous disposition. Charlie, the smallest of my wayward pack has no effect.

Finally there is the 'ssssch' command. The sound works. It works for me, although I am not consistent with it, it seems to be a calm command to control the dog and obtain attention.

So while some of what Cesar does may not sit happily with our cosy little view of the dog world, he does not give up on dogs. He rescues many and abhors abuse and violence towards dogs. You will notice also how he instills in his clients the need to remain calm with their dogs, even in the most frustrating circumstances. For this reason, I do admire what he does and continue to watch his shows. He is trying to change the way people view dogs, instilling the need to exercise and reward, to obtain respect through calm confident leadership, by setting the necessary rules, boundaries and limitations, and by trying to get people to stop buying dogs from puppy farms and by extension pet shops.

Ban puppy farms

I believe passionately in the need for stricter controls for the breeding of all animals. For this reason puppy farms or mills should be illegal. What would define a puppy farm or mill? It could be as simple as any place where more than a specified number of breeding bitches are present. This would be decided by discussion which inevitably would probably lead to too high a number.

Any breeder who has more than five breeding bitches is in my opinion a puppy farm. For me that should be limit.

We are often told by legitimate breeders that their purpose in breeding is not financial, but for the dogs and furthering strong pedigree lines. If the former does not apply, then the selective careful breeding should be limited to a minimum number of breeding bitches. Five breeding bitches producing up to 60 puppies a year is way too excessive for me, but I guess that would be a feasible limit to impose.

There is currently no desire to impose such legislation, other than that which is being discussed by the Welsh Assembly. Wales has a particularly problem not least because its great expanses of rural terrain and former farms allow perfect seclusion for the unsavoury savagery of puppy farming.

It is regrettable that today, in 2010 the UK has pet supermarkets and online retailers advertising puppies for sale. Those dumb enough to buy from these sources get what they get in dogs that are likely to have a higher chance of hereditary diseases, disabilities, behavioural problems and even present injuries otherwise hidden from view such as broken or fractured limbs.

It is time for the government to put forward a plan to eliminate these awful places of barbaric practice and in turn further limit the mass production of unwanted dogs.

Christmas fundraising

Our efforts to raise funds during winter have begun in earnest. This time of year is unusual because charity shops (in our experience) see a small increase in average daily sales, but the actual number of trading days available what with holidays means the overal income can fall slightly.

This was further compounded with the bad weather we experienced in January which I estimate cost the charity around £800 in net income, not a small sum for our small organisation.

This Christmas we have two events planned that we launched last year, and two brand new ones.

The two returning are our Grand Winter Raffle and our Christmas Bag Pack once again thanks to the Co-operative group.

Launching this winter as mentioned earlier is our Christmas Cards and 2011 Calendar. The cards are on sale now and available from either our web site or from either of our shops in Kidderminster and Stourbridge.

The calendar being brand new is currently being put together thanks to Priya Dadry who has offered her skills free of charge to design it. We will then pay a printer to produce 150 limited edition copies. Even without sight of it more than a quarter of those copies have been sold. We hope to have the calendar ready and posted out to buyers by the middle of December at the latest. Some will be available for sale in the shops and others via the internet.

Chester update

We have received the following update from Jo Cottrell re her work to rehabilitate Chester:

"Chester is doing great, he came out on a pack walk this morning, has been cycling and on the treadmill daily, loves it. Initial thoughts are that he just doesn't know how to be a dog, hence initial panic state when meeting the other dogs but now ok.

"Doesn't seem to have aggressive tendencies as reported yet but will update when I feed him with the pack. He's a case that needs to be immersed into dog pack life as he is very 'needy' with humans at present verging on separation anxiety. So a couple of weeks with them should help with that.

"Will do a full report over the next week for you. He's not got major issues so I would suggest that you start looking for a home for him. I can see if the local rescues here will help advertise. I will put together a video clip and put it on my website so you will then be able to link to it for people to view him...."

Thanks once again to Jo who is working hard to rectify the problems Chester has. Of course he is already available for adoption, however any rehoming would occur after the completion of this period of training and rehabilitation.

Chester progress update

Chester, the poor boy who is struggling so hard with kennel life has begun a period of intensive therapy, training and analysis. Happy Staffie Rescue have engaged the services of Jo Cottrell, a dog behaviourist. You can find out more about Jo and her work and services by visiting her website dogtrouble.co.uk.

e-newsletter coming

We have decided to bring forward our plans for an 'e-newsletter' to work alongside or replace the existing paper version of the Happy Staffie Rescue.

Our research has found some benefits in doing so.

• financial savings of £1.23 per year per supporter
• full colour throughout
• less paper - around 800 pages a year at present
• easier to produce and amend

We have selected several new members to be 'guinea pigs' to test the pdf version of the newsletter.

While at this stage the e-newsletter will be almost identical in content to the paper version the one key difference will be the use of colour throughout, whereas in the paper version due to cost only a few pages are in colour.

Dangerous Dogs Act - BE AWARE

If you are fortunate enough to own a wonderful Staffordshire bull terrier you need and must be aware of the Dangerous Dogs Act.

This is not because the DDA bans the beloved Staffie, which of course it doesn't, but because the evidence is clear - the police do not know what a Staffordshire bull terrier looks like.

Having checked out the illuminating DDAWatch web site I can across a page that lists some of those dogs seized and killed by the police. It is clear from some of these images that some of these dogs are Staffies or Staffie-crosses.

There are numerous online resources available and I recommend as a Staffie you make yourself aware of them so that should a police officer decide your Staffie is in pact a pit bull, or Tosa or any of the other banned breeds you know what you can do. Be aware, don't panic.

Dog Owners Voluntary Duty of Care Code

What about a voluntary dog owners Duty of Care Code.

I have been thinking of this as a way of showing others the way in which you can bring a dog up. Of course this is my personal belief, and is open to disagreement and debate, but it is entirely voluntary of course.

So what could go in the code. It could be a series of levels that owners can voluntarily undertake. They come in the following levels, and can be done in any order. You do not for instance have to have done the first listed. Your personal level will be dependant on how many levels you have attained or undertaken.

Here is a short list of the sort of things that could be covered:

Obtain your dog from either of a) a licensed breeder with at the very least the mother present and pups seen interacting with their mother, or b) a dog rescue organisation

Have your dog innoculated at the appropriate earliest opportunity

Have your dog microchipped

Have your dog neutered before any pregnancies

Take your dog to dog training classes

Ensure that your dog is regularly treated for fleas and worms

Exercise your dog at least once every single day

Provide safe warm clean bedding for the dog to sleep in inside the home


Based on the above it is possible to be a Level 8 if you say you do all these things.

If dogs had a God

An inadvertent comment I made in my last post brought me to this strange thought. Some will instantly say dogs, and all animals for that matter have a god, and that god is the one that those same people worship.

I would prefer to delve into fantasy and believe that dogs would have their own god, in whatever form it might take. Question is, for an animal that is 'mans best friend', would their god take the form of a dog or a human? And, if it were a dog, what dog would it be.

A human god would satisfy our vanity and belief that dogs serve us and look to us for leadership. The trouble with this theory is that dogs only do so if that leadership is present. If it isn't, problems arise in behaviour that can often be addressed by introducing or reinstating that human leadership role.

Of course the debate on leadership and the role of the human as pack leader is equally debated among some trainers and behaviourists - some believe we humans are firmly part of the dog pack and must assume leadership or face being ousted. Others that humans are not in the pack, but a separate leadership group.

Therefore a dog god must be a dog. Right?

If so, what dog would it be. It has to have a physical presence of some kind to satisfy our idolisation, an image to present and market much in the same way we still present 'our' view of god as an aged man with long white beard and hair wearing white robes.

Many breed-specific fans would no doubt nominate their own type to take the place as god among dogs. I can think of some that would fit the bill - German shepherd perhaps, or a great Dane? But how cute would it be for the god of dogs to be a jack russell? A terrier certainly has the mental capacity to keep all eyes on all things (or as many things) as it possibly can, thereby satisfying the requirement of a dog god to be everywhere.

Or perhaps, more significantly the dog god should be a mongrel, a cross-breed of every breed that has ever existed, a form that continues to slowly change in form as new breeds come into being. Quite what such a dog would look like is beyond description, though my own 17 year old could fit the bill. How would I describe him? Well he's medium sized, long thin legs, with evidence in his back legs of good muscle in his younger days. He has a Mickey Mouse face, white but with brown fur surrounding his eyes. His muzzle is quite long, and his ears half-prick and long. He has a double coat, with a relatively short but soft coat in the summer, blooming into a woolly bush in the winter. He continually sheds. He has a bellowing bark, but can be as quiet as a mouse. He gets all with all dogs and never displays aggression to them. He could be the dog god.

Fireworks for fun or fear

Firework night approaches and already those that feel the need are having their fun.

As the co-owner of four dogs, two of which have very definite fear of fireworks this time of year is particularly concerning.

There are a number of silent or quieter fireworks now available on the market and it is a shame they are not more popular.

Fireworks are a wonderful spectacle and great fun for kids so no one should want to see this end, but surely some responsibility could be applied.

Why can the sale of fireworks to the public not be limited to a few days, or even one day? Why are very loud fireworks even sold to members of the public at all? And why do so many ordinary folk want to do it themselves when the best displays are those organised by groups (and can usually be seen free of charge from a decent vantage point!).

I am glad that one of the local dog rescues has abandoned their fireworks night. What strange paradox that would have been, an organisation with the best interests of dogs at heart, partaking in an event that would put the fear of god (if dogs have one!) in to so many of them.

Charity Christmas Calendar

We are launching our first Charity Calendar (2011) and are accepting advance orders for what will be a limited 150-print.

You can find more information here.

Priya Dadry, graphic designer has kindly offered to design the calendar for us free of charge.

We hope over the coming weekend to be able to obtain the photographs necessary for the calendar and can then put these on the website to give you a flavour of what the calendar will be like.

Charity Christmas Cards

Our charity Christmas Cards are on sale now.

For information please visit our web site here.

Charity Shops update

Our charity shops remain our main source of income. The first, opened in Kidderminster in the summer of 2009 has been a complete success. It has paid for all its start up costs, and delivered sufficient income each month after all operating costs are deducted to support the charitable activities.

The second charity shop, opened in Stourbridge in July has unfortunately not yet delivered what we wanted or expected. While it has remained profitable, in that its sales exceed its operating costs it has yet to repay the cost of acquiring and building it up for opening. The level of income it generates each month is also low, to the point that it is not effective yet in allowing to increase the number of dogs in our care.

This present a conundrum that we must pass in the next six months. Our medium term strategy is to continue to roll out charity shops as these should, in theory deliver income. However the Stourbridge situation has alarmed us. Its operating costs are very low - much lower than Kidderminster but the sales are also a third less than the Kidderminster branch.

With finances tight, the only way we can only a third charity shop is if the second shop repays the costs it took to open. And that seems some way off.

Our retail managers are working at many avenues to try and increase not only customers, but donations without which the shop could not function.

So the risk is there. Charity shops are not a given, and when after we opened Kidderminster we were smarting at how our larger charity chains delivered such low margins, we now realise that the success here was not easily repeatable. But this is short term observations. The Stourbridge branch is not losing the charity money, it just isn't delivering the sort of income we would have liked. Therefore we can persevere with Stourbridge, hoping that the medium term will lead to better awareness of the site.

Dog Breeding Act - the Database

As mentioned in previous posts, a new national, free to access, public database would be created to support legitimate breeders, legitimate buyers and the media to adhere to the Act and encourage the good sale of dogs.

Whatever form the database takes it need now be complicated, flashy or expensive. It simply needs to be a database that ANYONE can view, but that only registered and compliant persons can access to amend or add.

Local authorities who administer the licensing and registered will have access designated to certain staff. Veterinary professionals would be allowed one access point per practice. The police may be given access, and the registered animal/dog rescue charities should be given access as well.

Only the local authority would have the power to delete entries.

Access to the Database

Add
Local Authorities, Veterinary Professionals, registered animal/dog rescues

Amend
Local Authorities, Veterinary Professionals (subject to review and acceptance by Local Authorities)

View
Anyone free of charge but at designated times to allow for smooth operation and upgrades and amendments, perhaps between 10am and 4pm or whatever time is designated by the designers.

Delete
Local Authorities

The importance of the database is that it is quick and easy to use.

For example, a veterinary professional is asked to check a pregnant bitch. The dog is identified by her microchip and the dog is Registered Dog. The veterinary professional will then either access the database immediately, or record details on paper or other means so that he/she or another appointed person in the practice can input the information to the database later.

Lets look at it the long way round. The owner brings a dog in that has had a checked history with the vets, perhaps missing booster injections, not being micro chipped and obvious neutered. The vet has the owners details and the dog, name and breed.

They record the details of the pregnancy. They access the database. If the owner is not Licensed (in breach of the DBA) and the dog is not Registered (in breach of the DBA) they will make an entry. No penalty would be given to an owner in this circumstance because we would not want to discourage people obtaining veterinary advice, however they would be liable in the following tax year for the License and Registration.

The simple owner and dog details are entered, and the database undertakes an immediate match with any records held. If none are held the database will send an electronic notice to the local authority to follow up the information and ensure the License and Registration demand is issued in the next tax year, and that the fees are paid (subsequent penalties will arise for late or non-payment).

The Dog Breeding Act: summary

So what would be achieved by this proposed (fanciful) piece of legislation.

1. No breeder would be allow to produce more than four litters a year
2. Veterinary professionals would register on pregnant bitches they come across (the onus will also be on the owner to do so)
3. All puppies produced must be registered and micro chipped
4. Breeders will be legally responsible to ensure owners are responsible
5. Breeders must accept any unwanted pups back within four weeks of sale
6. The advertisement of any dog will be restricted only to those dogs registered, and those breeders licenses, or to animal/dog charities and rescues
7. The ban on the advertised sale of dogs would extend to all forms of advertising in the UK
8. The medium used to advertise the sale of dogs will be required to ensure the license and registration is in place and current
9. A free to access online database of licensed breeders and registered puppies will be provided by the government

Dog Breeding Act: Part 3 Control of Breeding

Dog Breeding Act
Part 3
Control of Breeding

The next aspect of legislation is to ban the puppy farm, or any mass production puppy mills.

The level at which a breeder becomes a puppy farm is open to discussion, but I think any person or persons, or any property that breeds more than five litters a year (interestingly this is the current point a which someone is simply classed as a breeder) should be classed as in the mass production puppy farming business.

Legitimate breeders tell us they are not in the breeding business for the money, and therefore are not actually in any business at all. It is a hobby or pastime, an interest to them. Such comments should therefore confirm that they would not oppose a limit on the number of litters produced each year.

Any registered licensed breeder would therefore be limited to four litters a year (from a minimum of four bitches). Above this amount and the breeder is breaking the law. What penalties would apply have to be strong enough to punish those that break the law, and to deter those thinking of it.

By bringing the veterinary industry firmly in with the registering of pregnancies, births and chipping reduces avoidance of the legislation. The openness of the online register encourages responsible buying, and the ban on the advertising for unregistered breeders control those that can breed legitimately.

Therefore the penalty has to be in the form of cash and seizure of dogs and a ban on future dog ownership for a set period of time.

Dog Breeding Act: Part 2 Sale of Dogs

Dog Breeding Act
Part 2
Sale of Dogs

The current problem with unscrupulous or 'hobby' breeders is that they can produce litter after litter, without the scrutiny of authorities by simply evading the current licenses and advertising the sale of their dogs in almost any medium available.

Common routes to advertise the sale of dogs include classified advertisements in newspapers and magazine, online advertising, internet forums and chat rooms, cards in shop windows, social networking groups, car boots, friends, family, the local pub and any other meeting place or networking arena.

This part of the 'Act' would limit where unregistered dogs are sold or rehomed but would not make it completely impossible to sell dogs. Pit bulls continue to be bred, bought, sold, imported and exported in the UK. However their activities remain underground and limited to those within that circle. It is not impossible to obtain a pit bull, but you would have to go out and try and find it first. Whereas, for almost any other breed it is simply a matter of checking the local classified ads and biding your time until the breed you want appears.

The Sale of Dogs therefore would prohibit the advertised sale or rehoming or any dog (it could cover any animal if necessary) in any medium in the UK unless from a registered bitch and licensed breeder or a registered dog/animal rescue organisation.

The ban would cover all forms of media - print and online, radio and television (however unlikely), forums, chat rooms, social networking groups, markets, shops, car boots, and so on. The onus of proof is on the advertiser, but the onus to satisfy the proof is on the medium. Therefore the breeder (the advertiser) must prove to the medium (for example the newspaper) that they are licensed (by provision of their license number) and the medium has a onus to satisfy the proof (by checking against a public online register).

The online public register will act as a tool for breeders to advertise their dogs free of charge (they will be paying for it through their license fees), and also prospective owners to source legitimate dogs. The freedom to access the register is essential to allow media and other avenues to quickly, easily and without cost check the validity of a customers request to advertise.

Such restrictions would apply to any source of advertising or sale. So a car boot, where dogs are sold would be the responsibility of the car boot operator to ensure those dogs are licenses.

The penalties for the media breaking this ban should easily exceed the revenue generated from the advertisement. As most adverts in newspapers are small classifieds costing less than £50 the penalty to the media should be in the region of £100 or twice the advertised rate for the space of advert. The penalty could be a fixed issue from a police officer or any authorised agent, including local authorities or designated charitable bodies and must be paid within 28 days to avoid a summons to court, whereby the penalties would rise steeply.

In an instant the unregistered breeder, the unscrupulous breeder and the hobby breeder would cut off from the most popular sources of selling their unregistered litters.

As mentioned above, this would not stop the breeding, or the sale of puppies, but it would limit the avenues people can use. Leaving them few options but to join the underworld associating with pit bull breeders, hidden chat rooms and secret social networking groups.

Dog Breeding Act: Part 1 Licensing of Breeders and Registration of Dogs

I have decided to call my proposal the Dog Breeding Act. I do not for one minute believe any species-specific legislation would ever be passed to cover breeding of domestic animals other than in an outright ban (Dangerous Dogs Act), so please humour me.

Dog Breeding Act
Part 1
Licensing of Breeders

The current process for licensing breeders is aimed squarely at the legitimate breeder*. Unfortunately the scope is far too weak. First off, it is generally used to describe breeders whose bitches produce a total of five or more litters a year. Many legitimate breeders do not fall into this category, and the hobby breeder is almost totally excluded (as was the intention of the misguided Breeding of Dogs Act 1973, amended in the Breeding and Sale of Dogs (Welfare) Act 1999.

* I use this term to mean those breeders who currently breed dogs, in limited controlled numbers, who would accept an unwanted pup back in order to rehome it, and who are interested in the mental and physical welfare of the dog as opposed to the appearance-orientated requirements of the KC. These breeders would not abandon their bitches once they have passed their reproductive age, nor would they destroy puppies who did not fit the appearance stereotypes that some in the dog world insist on.

There are many good points in the current legislation. For example:

• Bitches are not to be mated until they are at least 12 months old.
• No bitch is permitted to have more than 6 litters in total.
• Bitches must not give birth to puppies within 12 months of producing a previous litter.
• All first time licences must involve the inspection of the premises by a vet and ourselves.
• Subsequent inspections may be by ourselves alone though we may call a vet if we feel the need to.
• A licensed breeder must not sell a dog to a member of the public if he/she believes that person will then sell the dog on to another individual.
• Dogs must not be sold under 8 weeks of age other than to a licensed pet shop.**

** this is plainly ridiculous, NO dog should be sold in a pet shop.

I believe that most legitimate breeders adhere to the above principles.

Therefore the scope of the existing Act needs to be expanded to include any and all dog breeder, even if it is a hobby breeder, accidental, or a one-off. Every single pregnant bitch must be Registered through their owner and the above criteria met (and expanded on).

The cost of the license varies widely from area to area, I have seen as low as £95 and as much as £270. These fees are however inadequate because they fail to take into account the number of dogs produced. I would introduce fees based on breeding bitches and dogs (those dogs that have not been neutered), and the number of puppies produced.

A basic annual registration fee of £100 for the License
£50 for each unneutered bitch ***
£25 for each male ***
£25 for each puppy born in the previous tax year. ***

*** this is the Registered nature of the dogs

Using the above example, a breeder with two bitches (assuming they use stud dogs) that each had a little with a total of 10 puppies produced in 2009/10 would pay £450 in 2010/11. If during 2010/11 they gave their bitches a rest, and no puppies were produced the license would fall in 2011/12 to £200 or they could simply allow their license to expire and not pay anything in 2011/12. The license would need to be tight to avoid people getting their bitches pregnant in one tax year, but only registering them in the tax year the puppies are born.

In addition to the criteria mentioned above the following should be added or amended:

• breeders are legally responsible for vetting prospective owners and keeping detailed contact information of those they sell their puppies too
• breeders are under obligation to accept a puppy back from the new owner if within four weeks the new owner wishes to surrender their dog (no refund necessary)
• all puppies produced must be microchipped by a veterinary practitioner
• veterinary professionals are legally required to add pregnant bitches and puppies to the database (mentioned below).
• a free public database will set up linking the breeder, the dogs, their puppies, the microchip numbers and the new owners.
• new owners will be traced via the microchips if their dogs are found, and will be charged any incarceration rates applicable, and should they decide to refuse to accept their dog back shall be liable for all kennel and related expenses up to that point, with an additional fixed penalty. Such payments being made to the authorities are then paid either to the local authority or charitable body caring for the animal. Such persons would also be liable to an immediate ban on buying animals (their details stored on the database).

A difference needs to be made between Licensed Breeder and Registered Dogs. The breeder must be licensed, paying the above fees. The breeder must all ensure their dogs are Registered, this encompasses all their adult dogs, whether owned for pleasure, business or hobby breeding or not AND all the puppies produced and available for sale or rehoming. Failure to comply with any of these measures would face a financial penalty, and possible cancelation of their license.

Now the biggest concern of this is non-compliance, but Part 2 of the Dog Breeding Act deals with this by ensuring that only registered licensed breeders can advertise the sale of dogs (other than dog rescues/charities) in ANY medium.

Could you realitiscally keep all your puppies if you could not sell them?

This was the wise poser raised on our Facebook page a few days ago. The poster raises a valid and interesting point. Only today we had a 'breeder' ring to ask if we could take a puppy off him - the owner had returned it, and it was not getting on with his "bitch".

When people face very real social economic problems that result in the reluctant surrendering of their dog, they will take priority over a arrogant and selfish breeder who cannot accept responsibility for the problem he has caused.

We therefore would decline help in this case. In fact, the only circumstance where we would help is if we received a financial contribution and the bitch being neutered. With over 100,000 stray and unwanted dogs (Animal Madhouse, Channel 4, November 3 2010) in the UK at the moment, and as many 40% of them Staffordshire bull terriers there can be no corner given to the unscrupulous breeder whose sole intention is to make money.

[I stress unscrupulous because I do want to separate those that breed wisely and in limited numbers, who are responsible with those they sell their puppies to, and who willingly accept and attempt to rehome (themselves) those puppies that are returned, from those that have led the recent explosion in Staffordshire bull terriers.]

So what is the answer? It is difficult to see a way of reducing unnecessary or unwanted breeding without tough measures, back by legislation, penalties and a strict licensing regime.

Over the next few posts I will put forward my proposal to control breeding, to allow legitimate breeders to continue to operate and to hopefully inconvenience those others to the point that it no longer becomes a financially beneficial process.

Donation Drive-Thru Sunday 7 November 2010

A major push for donated items will be trailed at Tesco Superstore, Birmingham Road, Dudley on Sunday 7 November 2010.

Thanks to the kind people at Tesco, Happy Staffie Rescue have been given permission to set up a point in the carpark of their store.

Donors can come between 10:30am and 2pm to drop off clothing, shoes, hats, jewellery, handbags, books, videos, DVDs, CDs, records, curtains, wool, kitchenware, housewares, bathroom, gifts, vases, ornaments, pictures, mirrors, toys, games, sports and keep fit equipment, seasonal, DIY, gardening and general bric a brac.

REMEMBER, where fabrics are concerned we can accept damaged goods as we can sell these for recycling.

For more information please go to Donation Drive Thru