Beginning of the end of the staffie?

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/politics/act-now-over-devil-dogs-families-tell-cameron-7636852.html

Recent figures showed maulings up 79 per cent in London in five years, amid an inner-city craze for “status dogs” trained for aggression and fighting.

Surely the figures are going to higher with more dogs in the population?

what it should read is dog attacks up 79 per sent FROM ALL BREEDS OF DOG it makes me laugh how stupid it makes them sound when they say devil dogs/status dogs that makes no sense any breed of dog can be a devil dog and status dog what are all the dogs getting carried around in handbags and little mop dogs with bows in there hair surly there status dogs

It dont make good reading, the law as to be changed because we are reading story after story in the papers at the moment about dog attacks, the only problem is, if they rush a bill though are they going to add staffys to DDA or staffy crosses. i think what we should do is all send videos of our dogs to the PM showing him how staffys are when they have a responsible owner and not some thug on the street....

From what I've read on this forum and elsewhere DEFRA sent out questionnaires to various animal organisation i.e. RSPCA, Dogs Trust etc. regarding the current DDA
All of these organisations are saying the same thing having BSL does not work. Whilst they are not pushing for the removal of the current BSL they are all saying that no other dog breed should be added.

The Government know they got it wrong back in 1991 which was why the amendment in 1997 was introduced.
I am worried about the new dog bill, not because I think that Staffords will be added to the banned list (as I don't believe they will be) but because I think they may impose staffords to wear muzzles at all times in public &/or staffords not being allowed off the lead, this would keep the mindless media feed numpties in this once great country of ours happy.
I am hoping for a proper Dog Control Bill which ends BSL and puts the responsibility firmly in the owners hands.
As has been said many times already Deed not Breed.

Someone is going to have to help me on this please......wot is it that makes a staffie a status dog, is the breed, their strength, their size....because I have no idea cos with mine Mack all i see is a big softie with big brown eyes and a massive heart (i dont even know the past history of Mack cos he was a rescue dog).

Mack had been in rescue for 15mths and over looked so many times, so when i looked at the rescue centre there must have been 15 to 20 kennels full of staffies some had singles in other had 2 in all making a god awful racket and Mack was the only one who was not barking.....we bought him outside and he went mad with excitement and attention (we means my 6yr old daughter and myself) we took him for a walk and he was so good never barked, he pulled abit (which staffie doesnt). the next day i went back and i bought my neighbours dog along as well and they got on really well, so i went back a week later again with my child and took him home.......Macks only big problem is that he is to friendly lol lol, he goes over to whoeva he see's to say hello....So im a single parent 42yrs old with a 6 yr old child who owns a staffie so the guy who stereotyped all staffie owners as skinheads, tattoos and union jack tshirt over a fat belly.......well he can well and truly kiss my A**

Im so fed up of getting looks "Oh F*** a staffie off people who are out walking their dogs as well when im out walking Mack, that i automatically put him back on the lead and then let him off again when its safe.

Again sumone please answer me this....if this type of dog is so vicious and dangerous why would people who have kids in the home have this dog as a pet (realistically would they not be classed as stupid and careless parents for putting their kids at risk with such a breed)....because if you look in a handbook about Staffordshire Bull Terriers it will tell you in black and white that in their past history they have been known as "NANNIE DOGS" which means that they have been in the nursery looking after the kids....because thats how loyal, loving and safe SBT's are.

Every single breed no matter wot it is has the potential to be dangerous.......(prime example my next but one neighbour has a dalmation their dog doesnt like other dogs and other people as well and they hav a child in the house).

Years ago was it not Alsations and then Rottweilers and then Dobermans they all had a bad name for being vicious, but it seems that Staffies are being singled out, and the people who train them to fight really dont care about their pets and the pain they are putting them through it's all about "my dog is harder than your dog" and money.

Im sure but is DISCRIMINATION against the law and that's wot the guy from the paper is doing SO YEH HE NEEDS TO BE FIRED ASAP!!!

from a very disgruntled staffie owner

Well said

There are so many staffs, you only have to look in kennels or walk through a town centre to see how huge the stafford population is in UK. Because there are so many the likleyhood of a dog attack being a staffy makes it higher. Its all facts and figures which are linked to probability. I mean if u had 50red marbles and 5 blue ones in a bag your much more likely to pull out a red one when picking them at random. Staffords are getting demonised

i do agree with everything that is being said on here and i lets be honest how would they even instagate a ban of staffies in the UK with 1000,s of them being owned are they going too try too snatch them from people homes, i know there is alot of people who are against dogs now but believe me their are a hell of lot more who are staffy lovers if they did ban the breed i am sure there would be a huge public back lash.

There are even a couple of MPs who have staffords!

But seriously, something needs to be done.

Caryll wrote:There are even a couple of MPs who have staffords!

But seriously, something needs to be done.

yes i know that i have even seen afew MPS in photos with their staffies,
I do agree something needs too be done but how too tackle this I think us responsible owners would try most things if it saved our dogs, but some of the suggestions are crazy, i heard one was too always keep dogs on a lead but if i dog isn,t run off and exercised it would make them more prone too be naughty or even aggressive, i only let mine off in dog friendly places, but they love too run and play, I don,t know what they can do too sort this but it has too come down too responsibble ownership

I would still love to see how the statistics would change if all dog bites by ALL breeds were shown

To quote a former American president, "There are lies, damn lies and statistics". This certainly rings true for this debate. You can twists things to appear however you wish and that's exactly what is happening with Staffies.

Just because there are more of them in the population it will appear that we see more stories of them attacking. It has to be put into proportion.

It is a pity whatever any new law wil be it will be just the responsible people who will follow it. And their dogs are fine already. The irresponsible people won't care and will continue to damage the staffie image.
I have recently been told that staffies are dogs for drug dealers.........
I am so careful with Stella that she does not run anywehere where she we are not welcome and even strangers give her claps because she is so friendly.
A yorkie went for her the other day, straigh away with teeth and everything after her nose. She just backed off and wagged her tail curiously what's going on and then walked away when she realised there would not be any fun. But I understand if it was the other way round it would be dangerous so it would be and probably would have to be treated differently but still when the other owner just laughed at it and at Stella I was thinking that something is not right here.....
Fingers crossed. It's such a shame with the bad press. I must say if there was a law about muzzles and leads I would just drive her to some secluded doggy places with friendly people and that's it. She is on lead on public places anyway but there is no need for a muzzle for Stella.

Equi wrote:I would still love to see how the statistics would change if all dog bites by ALL breeds were shown

I think it would
a. be frightening how many dog bites there are each year by all breeds and
b. be interesting how far down the list staffs are.

Caryll wrote:

Equi wrote:I would still love to see how the statistics would change if all dog bites by ALL breeds were shown

I think it would
a. be frightening how many dog bites there are each year by all breeds and
b. be interesting how far down the list staffs are.

was going to post similar questions.

been on the DEFRA website and a figure of 6000 hospital admissions (all be it in 2010) from dog bites/stirkes amazes me, even if one attack every day was a staff or as the papers quote Bull terrier type dog thats only 365 what are the other 5635.

I do remember the time when Rotties/Dobermans had a similar senario a good few years back, allways in the news for the wrong reasons, but i wasnt old enough to really understand or stay up to be able to watch the 10 o'clock news lol. Its ceratinly amplified with the use of internet and the Fad crazes that come and go .

Breeds come & go with the media.....

I remember the demonising of GSDs, Dobes, Rotts & now Staffs. Maybe, if it gets too bad people will stop buying staffs so much & switch to another breed and then they will get demonised?

What goes around, comes around.

Caryll wrote:Breeds come & go with the media.....

I remember the demonising of GSDs, Dobes, Rotts & now Staffs. Maybe, if it gets too bad people will stop buying staffs so much & switch to another breed and then they will get demonised?

What goes around, comes around.

I remember some of these getting bad press. I was always brought up with GSDs and rotty's, never had a problem with either. Infact, I have a couple of scars on my face from when I was young and attacked by an animal - it was a cat! I had just walked into the house and the cat decided it didn't like me and lept off the back of a sofa to attack me! Any animal can attack and do damage, no one breed is more likely to than another if brought up correctly.

I have heard from some friends that work in rescue's that husky's and husky crosses are going the same way as staffies, maybe not used as "hard" dogs, but being over bred and brought by people that have no idea how to train them and they are then going into rescues, so I do wonder if we will start seeing more stories of badly socialised ones in the papers in a year or two

Yes, the spitz breeds in general are having a hard time. Loads of them are being crossed with GSDs to make them look more wolf-ish.

I personally believe that there are too many Staffies being bread and sold purely for money.

When we brought Ralph, there were no checks on us, no one asked us any questions about our background, our home, nothing.

I think that you should have to be licensed, firstly to breed a dog, and secondly to own a dog. That way the number of each breed could be controlled better. When looking for Ralph, there were pages and pages of Staffies, compared to other popular breeds.

We just need to try and control who has the dogs – not ban the dog.

Jellytot wrote:I think that you should have to be licensed, firstly to breed a dog, and secondly to own a dog. That way the number of each breed could be controlled better. When looking for Ralph, there were pages and pages of Staffies, compared to other popular breeds.

Licenses didn't work before & are unlikely to work again. It would be far too costly to police - you'd get the responsible people getting licenses & the irresponsible wouldn't bother.

Caryll wrote:

Jellytot wrote:I think that you should have to be licensed, firstly to breed a dog, and secondly to own a dog. That way the number of each breed could be controlled better. When looking for Ralph, there were pages and pages of Staffies, compared to other popular breeds.

Licenses didn't work before & are unlikely to work again. It would be far too costly to police - you'd get the responsible people getting licenses & the irresponsible wouldn't bother.

i agree a bit of piece wont make a bit of difference . i actually think better training facilities are needed and not to be so expensive .....training and socialising from early age but also to train owners to be aware of behavioural patterns and how to recognise small changes and how to deal with them before becoming big issues ....

Like Caryll said, licences have been tried and it never worked, just results in bad owners not getting them anyway so only punishes the people who already are good owners.
I personally would love to see more facilites on educating people and getting the dog community working together but can't see any government paying for the costs.
Only thing that I can see will work is making the owners pay bigger prices and tougher sentences when they neglect, abuse or train their dogs to be aggressive

Thing is the thug owners don't care, they want aggressive dogs. Responsible owners already make the effort to go to classes and stuff.

only way of fixing dog problem is getting touch on owner if your dog attack someone you will face 10 years in inside and make sure everyone know they is the only way.....

well there is another way bring back national service so people learn how to respect things again that we have lost in our society

Absolutely agree have been saying that for years, i fully support national service. Start at 16 if you don't want to do a-levels and do 4 years, or start at 17 if you fail first year a-levels, 18 if you complete a-levels.

however it think there should be exemptions for high accidemitions, such as people who want to go straight into university into the medical field etc as it already takes a long time/a lot of money to do that, so a few years in service would be wasted as they would potentially loose their intelligence/ambition/body parts. but once again, it would never work as there are too many fall outs and economic factors.

Caryll wrote:

Equi wrote:I would still love to see how the statistics would change if all dog bites by ALL breeds were shown

I think it would
a. be frightening how many dog bites there are each year by all breeds and
b. be interesting how far down the list staffs are.

I would also like to see that!
Since I was a kid I was around "bad breeds" and I put my hands in crate with rotts and german shepherds...
AND I was bitten by toy poodle!!!! He did pierce the skin and there was a lot of blood, but the "damage" was not so sever. Also, I was attacked but not bitten by Alaskan Malamute (and I own one, LOL), (neglected) Labrador Retriever and Grate Dane.

The thing is that smaller breeds are usually not reported as their bite doesn't cause big damage to a person as the big or bigger dog theet can. If all bites were reported, I think that all small or toy breeds will be on the top 10 places!! (I have read some list about the most dangerous breeds and 6 out of 10 were small dogs, cant find it now )

However, here is a short report of a study about dog bites:
http://thepoodleanddogblog.typepad.com/the_poodle_and_dog_blog/2008/07/a-study-published-this-week-in-the-journal-applied-animal-behaviour-science-with-researchers-questioning-6000-dog-owners.html

p.s. all lists say "Pit Bulls" not "Staffordshire bull terriers"!
it is not the same breed! (Ignorant people!)

i have logged in to post this on this site as i have on many others
As has been said EVERYDOG can be dangerous, GSD's, Boxer's, Staffies, Doberman's, Dogue de Bordeaux, English Bull terriers, Akita's, these breeds usually get mentioned as these dogs are powerful and can do damage, yet more people attend hospital from bites from smaller less powerful dogs - aren't these also dangerous - a Jack Russell is one such dog - this breed could easily maul a child, so should this dog breed be band? NO!!! And those that use a dog for a 'status symbol' won't they just move on to the next breed of dog if we band the staff? Yes I think they would, after all any dog can be trained to be viscous.
All local councils should provide suit sized enclosed dog parks for dogs to be let off the lead, all dogs should be microchipped and all owners should have to attend basic dog training and if it is found that a person is not fit or responsible enough to have a dog then they should be banned from having one untill they have been deemed fit and ALL dogs should be kept on a lead while out walking in the general public and highways and all properties with dogs should be made to be fenced and secured to teh requirements of the size and abilities of the dog within that property. The only flaw in the ointment is who will police all this and where will the money come from. None dog owners would not like their taxes to pay for it the same as I have heard that childless people and the people that NEVER want children complain about heir taxes paying for schools and child benefits.
I hate it when I hear about dog attacks no matter what breed but we should punish the owner & blame the dog for the deed not it's breed.
But the answer and any actions to help the dog situation will only come through common sense talks with the right kind of people not through groups yelling. The media also is at fault for a lot of the feelings among dog owners because of the sensationalism of there stories. The staffy is a dog hounded by the media becasue it was picked on as the status symbol because of the pitbull ban. If the staffy is banned then as said above they will move onto the next and the next. It will never end while irresponsible people train there dogs to be mean and nasty and while the fighting rings are still in operation and these will never stop while there is money to be made.

its still down to greedy stupid people who overbreed staffies for money ,so if anyone you know fits the bill THATS who is responsible!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

harlou wrote:its still down to greedy stupid people who overbreed staffies for money ,so if anyone you know fits the bill THATS who is responsible!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yes & no.

Yes, there are too many staffords being bred indescriminately but these stupid thugs who want a stafford as an extension to their ineffectual d*cks would get a staff from somewhere if they really wanted it. All it takes is an underground network of owner/breeders who will supply the 'goods'.

It's the punishment of the humans that needs to be addressed over & above the breeding of the dogs. Long prison sentences for people who use their dogs for fighting, prison sentences for people who allow their dogs to be dangerously out of control, plus huge fines as compensation/restitution.

right then its quite simple ,most if not all of these ignorant d***heads do not own their own house ,so no one in rented accomidation can own a dog . brutal i know but it would stop the problem, unfortunately a lot of very nice people would suffer ,i would make every unemployed teenager do work for the community or better stil as someone else has said bring back national service.

harlou wrote:right then its quite simple ,most if not all of these ignorant d***heads do not own their own house ,so no one in rented accomidation can own a dog . brutal i know but it would stop the problem, unfortunately a lot of very nice people would suffer ,

Me, for one.

That's a really silly thing to sugest. That's throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

There are plenty of thugs around here who own their own houses. They're not all unemployed! Also a lot of them live with parents who own their own houses.

Anyway, owning a house doesn't make you a good, responsible dog owner.

Long sentences don't even deter people. Look at how many guns and knives there are on the streets. There are many more people shot dead in this country than are killed by dogs.

Status dogs are part of a wider social problem and need treating as such. People that have staus dogs have them for the same reason kids join gangs and carry weapons. 9 times out of 10 (at least), they're insecure and scared. No dog specific legislation that I can think of will work, the responsible will be the ones that are hit and the irresponsible will carry on regardless.

The only new legislation I'd like to see would be regulations on breeding, similar to the requirements needed for the KC ABS although there isn't the money to properly police it, it would be a lot easier for dodgy breeding outfits to be shut down once discovered.

And to whoever it was asking why Staffies have replaced the likes of Rotties and GSDs a the choice of dog for you average ball-less muppet, I think the introduction of BSL has a lot to answer for. Because they're the most similar looking legal dog to the APBT and the easiest to cross to try and breed a dog that looks like an APBT. I'd put good money on us not having the kind of problem we have with Staffies now if BSL hadn't have been introduced.

Galadriel wrote:And to whoever it was asking why Staffies have replaced the likes of Rotties and GSDs a the choice of dog for you average ball-less muppet, I think the introduction of BSL has a lot to answer for. Because they're the most similar looking legal dog to the APBT and the easiest to cross to try and breed a dog that looks like an APBT. I'd put good money on us not having the kind of problem we have with Staffies now if BSL hadn't have been introduced.

That's a really good point.

Caryll wrote:

Galadriel wrote:And to whoever it was asking why Staffies have replaced the likes of Rotties and GSDs a the choice of dog for you average ball-less muppet, I think the introduction of BSL has a lot to answer for. Because they're the most similar looking legal dog to the APBT and the easiest to cross to try and breed a dog that looks like an APBT. I'd put good money on us not having the kind of problem we have with Staffies now if BSL hadn't have been introduced.

That's a really good point.

Thanks, I think so

In regards to dog attacks I was bitten by a labrador on my last day of leave this is going back a few years. It was not on its lead with a kid approx 10 years old. It jumped up wiith its paws on my chest I went to stroke it and it grabbed my wrist. It severed nerves and partially severed tendons in my wrist. I was classed as unfit for 6 months. I knew the neighbour of this dog and he took me to hospital. This dog was well known as it had attempted to bite the neighbours kid and numerous other people. According to the police at this time it was Labradors that were doing all the biting. All dogs have the capability to bite, if the Staff was banned dickheads would just move on to something else

xarmy wrote: if the Staff was banned dickheads would just move on to something else

Too true. And then whatever breed they have will be crossed with something else to make it even 'harder' & we're back to square one.

some one had put to send videos of our dogs to people who will show and fight our cause....so why not all of us actually do this instead of talkinga bout it and waiting until its too late...a open forum to post your videos to be sent of in couple months, you never know how much gd it will do x

harlou wrote:right then its quite simple ,most if not all of these ignorant d***heads do not own their own house ,so no one in rented accomidation can own a dog . brutal i know but it would stop the problem, unfortunately a lot of very nice people would suffer ,i would make every unemployed teenager do work for the community or better stil as someone else has said bring back national service.

well that would be me out as i dont own my own house i rent

there only one way of fixing our problem is getting tougher on owners, if you let your dog bite someone then you should be look at 10 year inside and make sure everyone know it..... posters, tv ad newspapers ad so noone as a excuse for it

Steve wrote:there only one way of fixing our problem is getting tougher on owners, if you let your dog bite someone then you should be look at 10 year inside and make sure everyone know it..... posters, tv ad newspapers ad so noone as a excuse for it

Galadriel wrote:
The only new legislation I'd like to see would be regulations on breeding, similar to the requirements needed for the KC ABS although there isn't the money to properly police it, it would be a lot easier for dodgy breeding outfits to be shut down once discovered.

May I ask you what requirements you are referring to (KC ABS?) You might all know but I'm posting from the US. Curious to know. Thanks.

without giving my experience with a dog attack i seriously doubt that getting sent down for ten years is the way forward. just my opinion not tryning to start a debate bu ten years is a bit extreme when teh attack may possibly not be yours or the dogs fault x

micheled wrote:

Galadriel wrote:
The only new legislation I'd like to see would be regulations on breeding, similar to the requirements needed for the KC ABS although there isn't the money to properly police it, it would be a lot easier for dodgy breeding outfits to be shut down once discovered.

May I ask you what requirements you are referring to (KC ABS?) You might all know but I'm posting from the US. Curious to know. Thanks.

It's the Kennel Club Assured Breeder Scheme, not perfect but a good start - here's a link - http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/item/2158

I think too many irresponsible people can get hold of dogs too easily from irresponsible breeders who don't ensure they're selling their pups to the right people whether through ignorance or just lack of care and more concern for money.

I agree that 10 years is a bit extreme. Don't get me wrong, some of the low life that own dogs to look hard deserve it, but I also see it being abused and know that it will end up being staffy and other similar breeds owners that get punished. The out of control lab, jack russell, etc will still be the same. There should be tougher sentancing, but each case should be looked at individually. There should be classes in schools teaching kids how to behave around dogs, and some body language lessons, and maybe a few programmes on tv showing the same sort of things to adults? I know it won't solve all the problems, but it is a start. Then cut out irresponsable breeders, etc and we might be on the right track.

When i get home im going to write a book about dogs aimed at kids!

chmieloaf wrote:without giving my experience with a dog attack i seriously doubt that getting sent down for ten years is the way forward. just my opinion not tryning to start a debate bu ten years is a bit extreme when teh attack may possibly not be yours or the dogs fault x

its the only way of sorting this problem out... you should have fully control of your dog all the time...

Galadriel wrote:
The only new legislation I'd like to see would be regulations on breeding, similar to the requirements needed for the KC ABS although there isn't the money to properly police it, it would be a lot easier for dodgy breeding outfits to be shut down once discovered.

how in this earth are you going enforce a regulation on breeding? without money we dont have...

only way of fixing the problem is getting tougher on owners that mean longer in side!

yep its the owners ,there is no way to stop ar****les owning dogs !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!