melzawelza

In some ways I think some of those breeds which are bred by BYB's may even be healthier than those bred for the show ring.

If I think of the focus of the two groups, one group breeds to a conformation standard that their dogs will be judged against (and a winning dog is what the judge wants to see) vs a group of breeders where it doesn't really matter if the dog has a longer snout or a less round head.

It's a shame to say it but the Pug X dogs do not suffer the same horrendous brachy-headed issues that many of the purebred pugs do.

I love pugs, they're such fun, funky little dogs. And it breaks my heart when I see them living compromised, difficult lives because they simply cannot breathe properly.

What sort of person makes a comment like that about a disabled dog? Do posts to their website have to be approved or can individual staff members just post as they see fit?

I just feel ill and so sad that poor defenceless dogs and cats can find themselves at the mercy of people like that. Is this okay with the people of Wagga? Is it still happening? Are rescuers allowed on the premises? I feel helpless because I want to help but I don't know what to do.

Who are the "people like that"?

Possibly a pretty low paid council worker driven to distraction by volunteers who think they have all the answers and who rush to FB and the press when their words of wisdom aren't acted upon or policies they disagree with are practiced. Pound workers also get to deal with really difficult pet owners and they never have enough resources to do everything that should and could be done for the animals.

It happens.

Sometimes those volunteers who are supposedly all for the animals are in reality all for attention seeking, self aggrandising behaviour. And when their trouble making and failure to be able deal with the practical aspects of too many animals to save and to work with the pound staff sees them booted, they seek martyrdom. And its the animals who pay.

It pays to remember that there are ALWAYS two sides of a story and that those supposedly championing animals often have their own agendas. Of course government workers are gagged and they cannot speak to the press.

Whoever said the road to hell was paved with good intentions must have had experience with animal welfare.

I'm the first to admit that the welfare activists make a mess.

And you're right, it happens and it happens everywhere. But there is a track record of difficulty within this pound and for some reason other councils whose staff are paid equally poorly and work under the same stressors manage to suck it up and get better outcomes for their animals. In some cases, volunteers are the only ones with any time to help the inmates and over-stretched staff welcome the help.

Any pound's volunteers are paid nothing and work hundreds of hours under their own amount of stress, it doesn't mean they are there to be whipping boys when staff are challenged over their actions.

I honestly can't see much changing. Council will make noise about sorting things out and it will all go back to normal.

Things will change as they have different rangers and a General Manager who will make it work, I feel volunteers should still be able to help BUT they need to sign a confidentially document to stop this sort of thing happening again, also work with the rangers and management not against them it is all about the attitudes of all and for the animals as their top priority.

The issue happened well over 12 months ago and as Andrea said some volunteers go in like a bull at a gate and do get the staff off side, it's all about working together.

Are you kidding? Right, so the pound can go right back to doing an extremely sub-par job and being actively cruel without any worry of being exposed. If they do their job and they do it properly there is no need for a confidentiality agreement. Ever notice how other pounds who employ the right people and prioritise lifesaving and and welfare don't have confidentiality agreements, nor do they have scandals in the media?

What sort of person makes a comment like that about a disabled dog? Do posts to their website have to be approved or can individual staff members just post as they see fit?

I just feel ill and so sad that poor defenceless dogs and cats can find themselves at the mercy of people like that. Is this okay with the people of Wagga? Is it still happening? Are rescuers allowed on the premises? I feel helpless because I want to help but I don't know what to do.

Who are the "people like that"?

Possibly a pretty low paid council worker driven to distraction by volunteers who think they have all the answers and who rush to FB and the press when their words of wisdom aren't acted upon or policies they disagree with are practiced. Pound workers also get to deal with really difficult pet owners and they never have enough resources to do everything that should and could be done for the animals.

It happens.

Sometimes those volunteers who are supposedly all for the animals are in reality all for attention seeking, self aggrandising behaviour. And when their trouble making and failure to be able deal with the practical aspects of too many animals to save and to work with the pound staff sees them booted, they seek martyrdom. And its the animals who pay.

It pays to remember that there are ALWAYS two sides of a story and that those supposedly championing animals often have their own agendas. Of course government workers are gagged and they cannot speak to the press.

Whoever said the road to hell was paved with good intentions must have had experience with animal welfare.

It never fails to surprise and disappoint me when significant neglect and cruelty is defended on a forum for animal lovers.

[q

ETA again. I have just found this post from Just Andrea on a Past Rescues thread http://www.dolforums.com.au/topic/262675-glenfield-rd-animal-shelter-wagga-wagga/page__st__30 #39

and I think it explains some of the conflict between this pound and volunteers.

Yes special thank you to all those people on the country pound pledges page who hassled the Rangers when they were asked not. This is the result. Anything on rescue Rex that is due tomorrow is likely on list. And anything that isn't up on rescue Rex that is due tomorrow we will never know. The list - that I have been getting every week for 8 years successfully and sharing with rescuers and working well with Rangers - was the only way to make sure none didn't slip through the cracks that didn't get up on Rex. So thank you for ruining a long standing relationship many of us have with this pound- for ones that will be put to sleep without even a chance. You know who you are. Well done - you will be responsible for god knows how many deaths we won't even know about.

Just picking up on this quote from Just Andrea. She seems to be defending the pound however her words only show pound staff that are manipulative and use the threat of killing to keep volunteers quiet. I'm sorry, any pound that decides to kill animals to punish humans (whether the humans behaved justly or not) should no be in this position nor be in charge of the welfare of vulnerable animals. This is how these sorts of facilities keep advocates quiet - they know that if they threaten to kill or ban them from the facility, their love of animals will mean they stop demanding better. At some point that has to stop and the rescuers and volunteers need to demand better. I'm so glad these women have.

As a vet nurse, I completely agree with the article. I am sick of seeing dogs that can't breathe properly without airway and/or nostril surgery, or eyes so bulgy they require eye surgery to prevent constant damage and permanent scarring.

Just last week I saw a 2yo Frenchie die from respiratory distress. Owners rushed it into emergency after finding it collapsed. It was a warm day but certainly not hot. Hadn't been exercised or anything. It was a pedigree dog.

I would say at least 50% of our brachy patients are pedigrees and over 90% have severe respiratory issues. Watching them breathe with an ET tube in is heart breaking - it's like they are finally getting enough oxygen and then you have to take it out and they go back to struggling.

I am all for pedigree dogs but I am sick of seeing breeders excuse serious health problems as 'part of the breed'. When a dog's well being is severely compromised, that is not ok. And until breeders wake up and change their ways, stuff like this will keep being published. This article was not written by hard core animal rights activists, it was written by vets and researchers. They have nothing to gain by publishing this article, there is no ulterior motive.

Well said. There is a massive cruelty in the way many of these dogs are currently bred, and it is pedigree dogs that are the problem just as much as backyard dogs.

All this happened well over 12 months ago why has it taken so long to come out.

Because these volunteers and witnesses have tried and tried to resolve it with council directly to avoid having to go public. Council doesn't care, hence going to the media. And good on them.

I *love* this blog post.

http://www.seespotrunkennel.com/blog/retiring-dog-trainings-single-combat-warriors/

Those dogs are actually running on their hocks. Their HOCKS. The extremes in some breeds are absolutely awful.

That's just silly. All dog breeds are man made.

Yep!

no...only domestic dogs are man made; there are a lot of other dogs out there where humans didn't interfere much with breeding, e.g. dingo.

I thought it would be clear that I'm not including wild dogs under the banner of 'dog breeds'. I wouldn't call a dingo a breed of dog. They stand separate.

That's just silly. All dog breeds are man made.

I would support donations to Team Dog, who assist people whose dogs have been targeted by Breed Specific Legislation, help people to get their dogs out of the pound and back in to their home when dire financial situations could mean they are unable to reclaim their pet, support people having a hard time to hang on to their pets instead of surrendering them, work to change for the better how councils and pounds operate and provide enrichment programs for impounded animals. http://www.teamdog.com.au

Thank you Snook! <3

Dave-O we (Team Dog) are a young charity but we have achieved a lot in our short time. Last year we kept 98 pets out of the pounds in NSW and with the families who love then, as well as providing extensive advice and support to pet owners subject to breed specific legislation and other council action.

We ran two free microchipping events, and helped with low cost desexing surgery for many clients, too.

We support positive and reasonable animal management and we work alongside many pounds and shelters in achieving our goals, and do a lot of advocacy work too.

Funds are extremely important to what we do, and given the uniqueness of our programs we had overwhelming demand for our help in 2015. We have had to temporarily shut down financial assistance while we lay the foundations for sustainability long in to the future. Regular donations are a huge part of that and we are very appreciative of any donations people may choose to make. No pressure of course, there's so many wonderful charities around that deserve support.

You can find out more about us here:

Www.teamdog.com.au

Www.facebook.com/theteamdog

You should note that you only help people in NSW.

She did say NSW. I'm in SA but still support Team Dog because I'd love to see what they do either expand to other states or be adopted by people/groups in other states.

Only help not located. There's a difference. And by helping Team Dog you are not in any way assisting the formation of a similar group anywhere else.

Well, it would be logical to think that they're located in the state that they help. I think that the more support that Team Dog get, the more they can do to help people and pets and the more that word will get out about them. The more people who are aware of what they do, the greater the chance of someone realising it can be done and wanting to initiate something similar in their own state. Even if that never happens, I still love the work that they do and will continue to support them.

I'm in VIC and Mel has also provided the rescue I work with with advice, where she can. Things like possible avenues to try, approaches that might work when reasoning with council. Just having someone who is experienced and confident in negotiating with councils who we can contact is useful.

I have also donated to them even though I live interstate.

Just my 2c.

I'll be checking out some of the other charities also mentioned in this topic as well, I hadn't heard of a number of them.

<3

One day when we expand I'll really sit down and learn all your legislation (or get someone on board down there who already knows it) and will be able to be much more helpful! So glad that what advice I can give has been useful though.

I would support donations to Team Dog, who assist people whose dogs have been targeted by Breed Specific Legislation, help people to get their dogs out of the pound and back in to their home when dire financial situations could mean they are unable to reclaim their pet, support people having a hard time to hang on to their pets instead of surrendering them, work to change for the better how councils and pounds operate and provide enrichment programs for impounded animals. http://www.teamdog.com.au

Thank you Snook! <3

Dave-O we (Team Dog) are a young charity but we have achieved a lot in our short time. Last year we kept 98 pets out of the pounds in NSW and with the families who love then, as well as providing extensive advice and support to pet owners subject to breed specific legislation and other council action.

We ran two free microchipping events, and helped with low cost desexing surgery for many clients, too.

We support positive and reasonable animal management and we work alongside many pounds and shelters in achieving our goals, and do a lot of advocacy work too.

Funds are extremely important to what we do, and given the uniqueness of our programs we had overwhelming demand for our help in 2015. We have had to temporarily shut down financial assistance while we lay the foundations for sustainability long in to the future. Regular donations are a huge part of that and we are very appreciative of any donations people may choose to make. No pressure of course, there's so many wonderful charities around that deserve support.

You can find out more about us here:

Www.teamdog.com.au

Www.facebook.com/theteamdog

You should note that you only help people in NSW.

She did say NSW. I'm in SA but still support Team Dog because I'd love to see what they do either expand to other states or be adopted by people/groups in other states.

Only help not located. There's a difference. And by helping Team Dog you are not in any way assisting the formation of a similar group anywhere else.

Well, it would be logical to think that they're located in the state that they help. I think that the more support that Team Dog get, the more they can do to help people and pets and the more that word will get out about them. The more people who are aware of what they do, the greater the chance of someone realising it can be done and wanting to initiate something similar in their own state. Even if that never happens, I still love the work that they do and will continue to support them.

Thanks Snook :)

The long term goal of Team Dog is to expand to having a branch in every state (our mission statement is creating a safe, humane Australia), which can't happen without becoming extremely financially secure in the current NSW/ACT model (plus plenty of other stuff obviously, but without money it is impossible). So donations, particularly regular donations rather than one-offs, can make an impact and help us reach that goal.

Clearly that isn't something that is going to happen overnight though, so I understand totally if people in other states would like to support a locally based charity with different programs to ours.

You're right about word getting out, too. because our programs are quite unique here in Oz and have been very successful, it had generated a lot of interest and talk about our approach. I was invited to speak at the G2Z conference as well as the business of saving lives conference just recently in Sydney. I presented to a national audience on why pet retention is so important and the results that can be achieved if we start focusing on it a lot more. Lots of interstate shelters and rescues were very interested and came up to me afterwards to ask questions etc and hopefully some will now be working on implementing even small changes to help in the area they service. I always provide my contact info and am happy to help them where I can.

We have had an average of one death per year from dog attacks in this country for for the last 30 years. I'm sure it was happening previously to that too, seeing as it hadn't changed in all that time. Any death is awful but that's very low numbers considering how many dogs live alongside us in this country.

I don't have Australian stats (they probably don't exist) but dog attacks on the whole have hugely declined in the US since the 70s. Leasing laws, containment, a less lax attitude to pet ownership, desexing and education makes a big different. I see no reason why it wouldn't the same here.

Again, the attacks aren't worse, it is simply that no one would hear about any but the very bad ones in their immediate area. Social media means we hear about *everything*.

Pets in the Park: http://www.petsinthepark.org.au

They provide basic veterinary care to the animals of Sydney's homeless.

These guys are amazing!

I would support donations to Team Dog, who assist people whose dogs have been targeted by Breed Specific Legislation, help people to get their dogs out of the pound and back in to their home when dire financial situations could mean they are unable to reclaim their pet, support people having a hard time to hang on to their pets instead of surrendering them, work to change for the better how councils and pounds operate and provide enrichment programs for impounded animals. http://www.teamdog.com.au

Thank you Snook! <3

Dave-O we (Team Dog) are a young charity but we have achieved a lot in our short time. Last year we kept 98 pets out of the pounds in NSW and with the families who love then, as well as providing extensive advice and support to pet owners subject to breed specific legislation and other council action.

We ran two free microchipping events, and helped with low cost desexing surgery for many clients, too.

We support positive and reasonable animal management and we work alongside many pounds and shelters in achieving our goals, and do a lot of advocacy work too.

Funds are extremely important to what we do, and given the uniqueness of our programs we had overwhelming demand for our help in 2015. We have had to temporarily shut down financial assistance while we lay the foundations for sustainability long in to the future. Regular donations are a huge part of that and we are very appreciative of any donations people may choose to make. No pressure of course, there's so many wonderful charities around that deserve support.

You can find out more about us here:

Www.teamdog.com.au

Www.facebook.com/theteamdog

I don't really see an issue, what sort of conflict of interest are you thinking of?

A dog is better off not being born than locked in a small cage for 2 years with no interaction. Why do people breed dogs that could end up like this?

There's lots of reasons, mostly stuff like:

- Accidental litters

- Breed enthusiasts who do not want to see the breed die out and good genetics be lost forever

- Random crosses (deliberate or accidental) from parents that are not of any of the prohibited breeds, however the puppies come out with genetic shuffling that make them 'type' (i.e they fit the visual standard the government uses to identify prohibited breeds). Remember that the legislation isn't based on breed, it is based on appearance.

I just get annoyed when people rave about what the pounds should be doing but just keep posting again and again that they aren't doing anything, why don't they get off their bums and ring these places and ask if they can help....never happens.

Pounds can only do what they have the funds and staff to do.

Heaps of people help, all the time. I run an animal welfare charity keeping pets out of the pound (often paying pound fees where pounds won't reduce) while also working full time, so I think I'm doing my bit.

It's not rescues or anyone else's job to do what should be a government funded service under threat of pets dying. Rescue is there as a supplementary support, not as a free service to do the pound's job for them.

If the pound needs some volunteer help for various adoption and foster programs they need to implement a volunteer program and recruit for it. People love pets and there's plenty of people in droves who will help out if given direction.

ETA I feel the need to again express that there are some brilliant staff members at Renbury who really go above and beyond in every way they can without being given the resources to do more. They are not the issue nor the problem, in fact they are also victims.

The police insinuate she could not be walked due to her behaviour. Even if this was true, how is anyone supposed to build a bond with her and interact safely with her to ensure she is getting her social and physical needs met if they aren't allowed to interact with her? There should have been no issues with a dog savvy person building a safe relationship with her gradually over a couple of months and that person being her primary carer from there on in, ensuring her needs were met.

All that aside I suspect the police are making excuses anyway. This isn't unusual in the UK or even here in Australia. Once dogs are deemed as 'restricted' they are not seen as dogs anymore and all sorts of things that would be considered cruel to any other dog are suddenly permissible.

I agree that pounds should be doing everything they can to save lives trust me, my point is that it seems we don't try and change the way people treat their animals as disposable. It's just accepted and then it's the pounds problem.

Frankly pounds and animal management in general need much more funding in order to operate the way we would like them to but they don't seem to rate very highly with the government.

Re cats being seized...this may be law but why should people have to put up with other people's pets crapping in their garden and stirring up or attacking their own animals? Again it comes back to irresponsible pet owners. Don't want your cat taken to the pound? Keep it on your property

I also find the insinuation that pounds are holding pets ransom a bit offensive. I remember calling and calling, sending letters, emails etc to no avail. Telling people their animals are there and them saying sure they'll come in (no fees by the way at one facility) and never hearing from them again. Despite what people seem to think most people at the pound want to get the animal home. I can't count the amount of times I've been told to "Keep the bloody thing, it keeps getting out, kill it I don't care".

I get that some pounds charge exorbitant fees and I agree this doesn't help. I also agree that helping people work around their problems so they can keep their pet is fantastic. I just know what I've seen working at a number of facilities and that is that there are a LOT of people who just don't give a shit, and whilst I want to see the best rehoming rates possible, I'm sick of pounds and their staff getting the blame whilst we pretend the rest of the population is just going through a hard time and that's why they didn't pick up their animal when they said they would, or ignored our calls or just dumped it at the gate overnight.

Sorry for the rant and I know no one here has blamed the staff, but working where I have has made me a total misanthrope and most of my colleagues also. I can't pretend everyone wants the best for their animals when I know it's not the case. We do our best for the animals and we get abused by the people who are meant to care about them and then slammed by all the other people who hate us for apparently not caring for those same animals. You can't win.

There are of course bad eggs but most people do not treat their animals as disposable. In NSW only between 3-6% of the pets out in the community end up entering an impounding facility, and only 2-3ish percent stay there and need new homes. So, about 98% of pet owners are keeping them out of the pound every year.

Of those few that are left there, a good percentage would keep their pets if they thought that was an option and were provided with assistance to do so. Studies in the US have found that between 70 - 88% will accept help when offered (key: in a helpful and non judgmental way).

So yes, while there are people out there who are shitheads and shouldn't own pets, they're a tiny, tiny percentage of the general pet owning population. Blaming them for pounds killing pets is nothing but smoke and mirrors. Pounds will always need to be in existence, just like hospitals will always need to be in existence no matter how much you work on preventative medicine and teaching people how to maximise their health. Shit happens and some people do stupid things. Same situation in the pound - people's lives change and they can't keep their pets, and some people are shitheads. Pounds need to be there to help those pets in to a new home, not kill them.

I actually don't think that no one is working on keeping pets in their homes. My organisation, Team Dog, does just that, although we are in the minority. In the US, progressive pounds themselves have recognised that enabling reclaims and providing help to people thinking of surrendering is imperative to stop killing within their walls and have implemented those programs themselves. I've given three presentations in the last twelve months to pounds and shelters urging them to prioritise keeping pets at home, as this will hugely impact on their live release rate. You don't get that by telling people who are thinking of surrendering that they're shit, though. You get it by sitting down with them and figuring out what's going on, working through the blockades and emotional hardening that some people do when they get to the point of surrender, and seeing if you can figure out a solution.

If you work on reclaims and pet retention, you're only left with a much smaller amount of pets you need to find homes for. That equals more space and more resources that can go in to those pets to ensure they make it out alive.

Whether someone likes the term or not, refusing to send a pet home to the family that wants them back for a large fee while threatening to, or actually killing them when they can't pay is holding a pet to ransom. You described a pound that didn't charge a fee for reclaim and people still not reclaiming - no one would call that holding a pet to ransom. I'm talking about pounds who will not reduce or at least freeze fees for a period of time to give the owners a chance to raise them, or simply waive fees for the first offence if the person can't afford them.Talking about cost is silly - it's a two week minimum hold for a chipped pet here in NSW. It costs the pound money to hold the pet for two weeks and then either kill it or hold it for longer while you find it a home. Send it home on day one or two by waiving some fees and you're likely to come out on top, or at least break even.

I agree pounds should be doing everything possible to rehome animals, even if it means giving them away for free, although desexing, vaccs, microchipping etc needs to be paid for somehow so it's not all that easy, however I get sick of people saying the pound needs to take responsibility as if they caused the problem.

Yes they do need to take responsibility for the animals in their care BUT the general public needs to take responsibility for their pets. We shouldn't have this problem in the first place.

Once the animals are in the care of the pound, their lives are the pound's responsibility. Blaming the public for killing is a deflection. The pounds are the ones who hold them down and overdose them on barbituate rather than implementing programs designed (and proven) to save their lives.

The really great pounds in the US also have pet retention programs - support for pet owners looking to surrender (up to 88% accept help to keep their pets when offered), as well as a big focus on getting pets back home rather than holding them ransom.

In NSW it can cost upwards of $300 to reclaim a pet on the same day it was impounded, with the price increasing by between $20 & $40 per day.

Melza what do you mean seized illegally?

Are you talking about cats trapped on other peoples property?

Cats are allowed to roam in NSW and there's very limited situations where you can seize them. They have to either be in a prohibited area (food prep and wildlife protection areas), or be attacking other animals/people at the time of seizure. Most cats in pounds are not seized legally.

It would be interesting to know how many cats they rehomed or released to rescue that week... may put a bit more perspective on the numbers issue.

It's all well and good to pick at the euth stats - but it needs to be balanced with the rehoming/rescue release stats to give an overall picture of performance, yes?

T.

Not really. Maybe if they were doing all the things listed in my post then it might be worth taking in to account, but if you're killing 25 cats for space but not even doing a 'clear the shelter' adoption promotion to try and get them out alive prior, then it's unacceptable.

Not saying I support everything in the petition at all, I actually haven't signed it because it's not really the way I'd word the issue and I have no idea about some of the stuff in there, but I disagree with the assertation that Renbury had no other option but to kill those cats, or that it's acceptable to use killing as a management tool when there's options to get them out alive.

I agree that Renbury are great to work with as far as rescue is concerned, and that they do do some really great stuff (the facebook page is excellent), but we need to get out of the outdated idea that to be great all a pound has to do is make the animals available to rescue and adoption, and kill anything that doesn't make it out in time. Pounds (and this is NOT exclusive to Renbury) need to start actively taking responsibility for the positive outcome of the animals in their care, and that includes embracing programs that get them out alive and taking killing off the table.

Once again, there's some amazing staff there and I don't direct my comments to them. They are doing their best in a broken system. The issue is management.

pounds don't have unlimited room to keep cats. What are they supposed to do?

but what else are they supposed to do when space is limited and no-one wants to take said cats?

T.

what else can they do if homes cannot be found.

There's so much they can do, that other pounds and shelters are doing successfully.

-Run a 'clear the shelter' feb 29th adoption promo - all cats and kittens $29/some other clever clear the shelter adoption promo. Advertise accordingly.

-Partner with pet shops, book shops, cat cafes etc to regularly send them vetworked kittens to be adopted directly from those premises.

-Work on customer service training for staff. Some are amazing (and people I'd call friends). Some are unbelievably rude to owners, potential adopters and rescue/community groups. Not great for spreading the word that if you want a cat you should go to Renbury.

-Refuse to accept cats that have not been seized legally (i.e most cats). They were doing this once upon a time but not sure if it is still happening.

+ lots of other great and innovative things that other shelters all around the world are doing.

It's hard for me to say these sorts of things because there are staff at Renbury I would call good friends and I know they do the best they can under management that runs Renbury as a profit-making exercise and would rather see pets killed than do some great promotions that save lives.

Comments I make are not against them. But at the end of the day killing 20+ cats in one day in this day and age without trying the myriad of other options that would have seen them get out alive is unacceptable. If public scrutiny forces management to change their ways then it can only be a good thing for the animals. We've seen it proven time and time again that it is possible to stop the unnecessary killing but only when killing is taken off the table as a management option.

We are getting more and more places that are now banning dogs from their areas because of reports like these. Either dogs hurt or killed by roaming dogs and even people hurt or killed by roaming dogs.

As a kid we had dogs wandering around... never remember there being any major issues, but then most of the dogs around were kelpies, labs, borders and mixes of these... The worst you usually had to deal with were the odd ACD that would have a grab at your ankle if you were riding your bike.

I know I will be 'hounded' by many here, but generally the cases we have problems with are of the bully breeds and their crosses.... Problems based around these breeds - from 25 years experience running training groups for family dogs and dealing with behaviour issues.

* often people who are attracted to these breed are not aware nor equipped on how to deal with the bully breeds.

* these are breeds who are not generally good at mixing with unknown dogs.

* when these breeds bite they bite hard and generally go for the face

* often huge strong dogs with hard bodies that are hard to pull off when they do attack

* many of these breeds have a low tolerance to any perceived sign of aggression from other dogs....

* many of these breeds are difficult to house in normal fencing... they climb/scramble easily and will burrow and pull panels down.

The issues seem to be getting worse, but I have to question if this is due to the increase in the number of these breeds / cross breeds in the average family home.

I run a small boarding kennel and now find I don't take these breeds over the xmas or easter holidays unless I know and understand the dog in question. They are often just too hard to deal with.

I was told once that we only regret things that have changed in the last 30 years. Unfortunately I worry that it is likely in 30 years from now (when I am dead and gone).... this will be a world where there will be no dogs.

It's not getting worse, you're just hearing about it more. Your profile pic says you're in Victoria - would you have heard about a dog attack that happened in the ACT 30 years ago, before the internet? No, you would have only heard about your locals or maybe a fatality on a person elsewhere in the country. But now you're reading about this one.

'Bull breeds' (a massive umbrella term for numerous pure-breds and mixes) are pretty much the most popular dogs in this country. There are hundreds of thousands of them in existence, and almost all of them will never be involved in anything. The vast majority are owned by loving owners no different to any other loving dog owner. Given just how many they are, it is to be expected that more of them would be represented in dog bite incidents (labradors are also very high in the bite stats - very popular breed). It would be odd if they weren't.

On top of that, remember that any attack involving a blockhead is picked up much more widely and numerously by the media when it happens vs other types of dog.

Also the point you made about dogs being able to roam is salient - back then dogs were socialised to meeting other dogs out in the street and how to deal with that because they were doing it practically from when they were born. These days dogs are cooped up in backyards and many are undersocialised, meaning when they manage to get out all hell breaks loose (the vast majority of dogs of all breeds cause no issues at all when they get out). I'm not saying we should go back to having dogs roaming but it does absolutely impact on how social the general dog population is.

If you think that serious attacks are limited to 'bull breeds', you need to work as a council officer for a few years investigating dog attacks.

It's excellent and a fantastic, progressive way to get rescue in to the front and center of people's minds when they next go looking for a dog.

Annnnd watch it do the opposite of what they want and increase impounds. Happens every single place mandatory desexing is introduced.