Author: Jasmine Kleine

An MP has introduced a bill in Parliament to ban the consumption of dog meat in the UK, making it illegal to eat dog meat and to transport, possess or donate it for the purposes of consumption.

When introducing the bill, Conservative MP Bill Wiggin said there was no evidence that dog meat was being consumed in the UK (as it stands the practice isn’t banned, but no slaughterhouses in the UK that have a licence to kill dogs or cats) but he “would like our country to join in setting an example to the world”.

“This is because China argue that until we make it illegal, why should they?”

Wendy Higgins from the Humane Society International, well-known for its campaigning to end the brutal trade, believes the move could have diplomatic benefits, telling K9 Magazine:

“The power of a UK ban on dog and cat meat would be largely symbolic because Britain has no dog and cat meat trade, there is no evidence to suggest that anyone is eating dogs and cats here. The real job of ending this brutal and largely crime-fuelled trade lies in seeing more bans enacted across Asia where the trade is concentrated.

“So, as we urge policy makers in those countries to take decisive steps to end this trade that kills 30 million dogs and 10 million cats a year, a ban here in the U.K. would show solidarity with those like Taiwan and Hong Kong that have already introduced bans, as well as encourage the momentum that we are already seeing in South Korea and Indonesia towards an end to this brutal industry.

“Whilst I don’t see any indication that countries like China are waiting for a UK ban before acting themselves, it certainly doesn’t hurt diplomatically.”

Mr Wiggin’s bill passed to second reading unopposed in Parliament but needs government support to progress further.

If it is written into law, the UK will join the USA, Germany, Austria, South Australia, Taiwan and Hong Kong in banning dog meat consumption.

Tabitha Willett has called on fashion house Chanel to explain having two dogs locked in small cages in their Sloane Street store in London at 11pm.

A well-known dog lover, the former reality star called on Chanel to answer for their actions and was told the dogs were in store for “security purposes”.

Photo Credit: Instagram/Tabitha.Willett

According to Sky News, Chanel reportedly told Willett the dogs were kept in the cages for a “few” hours at a time, and were under the watchful eye of a handler.

She has since reported the issue to the RSPCA.

I mean, some dogs really are obsessed with it, aren’t they?

Take Maggie-May for example. She’s a 22 month old Shih Tzu and recently she gave her owners a shock after swallowing a size 12 sock, which her owners discovered missing after she was spotted playing with the laundry.

Maggie-May’s owner, Jessica Tolley, said: “We were at home when Maggie-May was chewing and playing with a sock, when all of a sudden, she bolted off the chair and started making a funny noise.

“I realised there was a good chance she had swallowed it but my partner Ross and I could hardly believe it and we got up and started trying to find it.

“Although Maggie-May seemed fine, the sock was nowhere to be seen after we searched high and low, so we took her to the vets.

“All the way there, she was acting as if there was nothing wrong and I was convinced there was no way a dog her size could swallow a sock so big.”

Luckily, vet Naomi Roberts at the Beech House Veterinary Centre in Warrington were able to retrieve the sock and Maggie-May was no worse off but rather seemed to enjoy the adventurous day out!

Jessica, who has recently had her first baby Alannah, added: “On the way home from the vets, Maggie-May was sat in the car like she’d been out for an adventure.

“We are now very careful not to let her have socks any more but she is automatically drawn to the washing basket and always goes to get one out so we have to be very vigilant.

“I never thought she would be able to swallow one so big.

“But she must’ve sucked and chewed it so much that it slid easily down her throat.

“I have just had my first baby so I’m going to have to be extra careful she doesn’t get her paws on any little socks.”

The British Government has today published its reply to the committee which has been looking into the Dangerous Dogs Act, how it works and how it could be improved by education. The committee published its report last October and encouraged the Government to take various steps, including introducing new training, similar to a speed awareness course for drivers, for low-medium level offences and new education initiatives for local authorities and officers.

They also examined Section 1 of the Dangerous Dogs Act which states that four breed types are illegal to own breed, sell, gift or allow to stray in the UK.

The committee learnt from animal welfare experts in the rehoming industry that as a result of the legislation, dogs were being put to sleep because they could not be rehomed.

The committee concluded that: “We are concerned that Defra’s arguments in favour of maintaining Breed Specific Legislation are not substantiated by robust evidence. It is even more worrying that non-existent evidence appears to have been cited before a Parliamentary Committee in support of current Government policy. This lack of clarity indicates a disturbing disregard for evidence-based policy-making.”

“The prohibition on transferring Section 1 dogs has resulted in the unnecessary destruction of good-tempered dogs that could have been safely re-homed. Defra’s position is both illogical and inherently unfair. Whether a dog is euthanised or not can depend entirely on whether it ‘looks like’ a Pit Bull Terrier. It is unnecessarily cruel to forbid good-tempered dogs from being transferred to responsible owners willing to comply with the stringent provisions attached to keeping a Section 1 dog.”

On this point, the committee recommended the Government: “remove the ban on transferring Section 1 dogs to new owners. This should be accompanied by adequate regulation of animal centres and appropriate safeguards to ensure the re-homing of Section 1 dogs is conducted responsibly and safely.”

The Government responded saying:

“Any proposals to amend the law here, for example to allow prohibited dogs which have no previous court approved owner to be rehomed, or to transfer a prohibited dog to people who have had no contact with the dog, would require an amendment to the DDA and the supporting secondary legislation. The Government does not consider that it is a priority to amend legislation at this time. We would also need to consider the implications for public safety and the increased burden on the Courts before any legislative change could be made, as well as the implications for rescue and rehoming centres themselves.”

And continued that it: “recently invited comments from the public and stakeholders on the issue of licensing such establishments in connection with a possible ban on the third party selling of puppies and kittens. The Government considers that, should a decision in future be made to amend the DDA around rehoming prohibited dogs, licensing would be a necessary prerequisite before considering whether such establishments could have a formal role in any rehoming.”

Dr Samantha Gaines, RSPCA dog welfare expert and lead author of the ‘Breed Specific Legislation: A Dog’s Dinner’ report, gave evidence to the committee’s review last year.

Commenting on the Conservative Government’s response she said, “We are extremely disappointed that the Government is still suggesting that prohibited types of dogs are more dangerous than other types of dogs and that they are involved in a disproportionately high number of attacks on people, including fatalities. The RSPCA, in its evidence to EFRA, made it very clear that in the absence of robust data around the dog population such claims cannot be made and it is misleading to do so.

“We are also hugely disappointed that despite EFRA recommending changes which would mean that friendly and rehomeable banned types of dogs could avoid being put to sleep, the Government is unwilling to do so. For the past 27 years thousands of dogs have paid the ultimate price as a result of this draconian and unjust legislation which penalises dogs simply for the way they look. This has lead to the unnecessary destruction of hundreds of friendly and well-behaved family pets and dogs that organisations like ourselves could rehome.

“We’re looking forward to the conclusions of the research project currently being undertaken by Middlesex University. Our own research has shown that there is a lack of scientific evidence to support BSL and positive evidence against it. We remain confident that the outcome of the research will be one which recommends breed neutral legislation and that Government will act on this.

“The Government urgently needs to act on this; public safety and the lives of thousands more innocent dogs in the future rely on it.”

Full access to the Government’s response is available here.

In a nutshell, nothing is set to change for the dogs most at risk of losing their lives due to how they look, rather than act, because of the law. 

We all love to treat our dogs. Birthdays, Christmases and sometimes just because we want to. But which regions of the UK spend most?

New research from Direct Line Pet Insurance has revealed that dogs in London, the East of England and Scotland are owned by the biggest spenders, as a generous 18 per cent of Londoners spend over £100 on their dog at Christmas.

The majority of dog owners (41 per cent) spend between £10-20 on their dog at Christmas. More than a quarter of owners spends between £21 and £40, while a generous four per cent spend between £81 and £100.

However, Christmas isn’t the only time that owners pamper their pups because over two-thirds of pet owners admitted to buying their dogs presents whenever they see something they’d like.

All About the Mane

Comparing owners grooming habits to their dogs, 2 in 10 dog owners take their dog to the groomers every couple of months whereas 22 per cent of owners only visit the hairdresser once a year.

In the age of the well-groomed modern man, it may come as a surprise that half of men admitted that they spend more money on their dog’s coat than their own hair.

Room for Another?

It seems the extent of pampering is endless, as the research showed the majority of dogs in the East Midlands, North West and South East have their own rooms, but overall dogs across the country sleep where they want.

Prit Powar, Head of Pet Insurance at Direct Line, said: “Naturally dog owners treat their four legged companions as part of the family and these results aren’t surprising coming from a dog loving nation.

Christmas is a great time for owners to be with their dogs but it’s impossible to keep an eye on your pet all the time. With all of the extra food around at Christmas, it’s crucial to be aware of what pets are eating as some human food can be poisonous to dogs.

If you feel your dog has eaten something they shouldn’t have, all Direct Line Pet customers will be able to connect with a vet 24/7 through Pawsquad which is provided for free with their pet policy. If in doubt, customers should get their pet to the vet immediately just to be on the safe side.

“Direct Line urges responsible dog ownership all year round and Christmas is no different. Direct Line Pet Insurance customers concerned about their pet’s health can take advantage of free access to the PawSquad app, which allows users to video call or text a vet in any situation including emergencies.”

Apparently one in 10 men do.

In new research, out today from Direct Line Pet Insurance, 9 in 10 dog owners have admitted to finding it easier to buy gifts for their dog than their family.

Dog owners also admitted to spending more money on their pet’s presents than friends’, grandparents’, siblings’ and even their parents’ presents.

Almost a third of dog owners choose to give their dog their Christmas presents before their partner because they’re more excited to give it to their pup (probably a good decision to stop the dog rummaging too!).

Prit Powar, Head of Pet Insurance at Direct Line, said “Naturally dog owners treat their four legged companions as part of the family and these results aren’t surprising coming from a dog loving nation.

“Christmas is a great time for owners to be with their dogs but it’s impossible to keep an eye on your pet all the time. With all of the extra food around at Christmas, it’s crucial to be aware of what pets are eating as some human food can be poisonous to dogs.

“If you feel your dog has eaten something they shouldn’t have, all Direct Line Pet customers will be able to connect with a vet 24/7 through Pawsquad which is provided for free with their pet policy. If in doubt, customers should get their pet to the vet immediately just to be on the safe side.

“Direct Line urges responsible dog ownership all year round and Christmas is no different. Direct Line Pet Insurance customers concerned about their pet’s health can take advantage of free access to the PawSquad app, which allows users to video call or text a vet in any situation including emergencies.”

Related article: Make your dog their own Christmas meal this year with our dog-safe Christmas Menu for Dogs (including doggy mince pies!)

A better understanding of the way dogs communicate distress could be the first step in reducing the risk of dog bites for both children and adults, a new study has found.

Psychologists investigating how children and parents perceive and interpret dog’s body language found that both groups significantly underestimate and misinterpret the way that dogs display distress or anxiety, including behaviours such as snarling or growling which can cause a significant risk to children.

The project consisted of three phases involving children aged three, four and five years old and one group of parents.

Initially, each group was shown a series of short video clips of dogs displaying a full range of behavioural signals which ranged from happy dogs through to high-risk conflict-escalating behaviours such as growling, snarling or biting. Participants were then asked to rate their perception of the behaviours on a simple, child-friendly scale from ‘very happy’ to ‘very unhappy/very angry’.

The groups then took part in a training phase where the videos were repeated, this time accompanied by simple information explaining the type of behaviour the dog was displaying, for example, ‘the dog is licking its nose’, how to interpret the behaviour – i.e. the dog is worried, followed by a safety message such as ‘you should leave the dog alone’. Participants then also saw novel videos with all behaviours.

Once the training phase was completed, participants were immediately tested to establish their judgements of the dogs’ behaviours then testing again after six months and after one year to measure whether the training had a lasting effect.

Results showed that younger children found it harder to correctly interpret dog distress signals with 53 per cent of three year olds misinterpreting high-risk signals such as growling or snarling. Of the children who made mistakes, 65 per cent thought that these dogs were happy. Results showed 17per cent of the parents also incorrectly interpreted these behaviours.

After the training intervention, both children and adults showed better understanding. Most improvement was found on conflict-escalating signals such as staring, growling or snarling with adults and older children showing the highest levels of improvement. Pre-training, only 55 per cent of four year olds were able to correctly interpret high risk dog behaviours with this rising to 72 per cent post training. The training was also shown to have a lasting effect with the figure rising to 76 per cent twelve months post-training.

Lead researcher Professor Kerstin Meints from the University of Lincoln’s School of Psychology said: “We observed that children often try to apply an explanation for the dog’s signals that would be appropriate to explain human behaviour. For example, children often wrongly interpreted a dog snarling and showing its teeth to mean that the dog was happy, which could put them at significant risk if they were to approach a dog displaying these signals.

“This project is the first to offer an intervention to significantly enhance children’s and adults’ abilities to correctly interpret dog signalling and has shown that with simple training we can improve their awareness, knowledge, recognition and interpretation skills.”