This post is aimed as much (if not more so) at those of you who strongly agree with this decision, than those of you who disagree with it. It is a post written with the sole intention of making you THINK. Making you genuinely, critically analyse and dissect the information presented. A post intended to recognise, encourage, respect and challenge your knowledge and intelligence as a responsible dog owner. All I ask, is that you read it fully and (although this is incredibly difficult where emotion has been deliberately whipped-up in order to cloud clarity), objectively consider the comments herein? If you are prepared to do this, then you have my respect; and my thanks.
Roseanna Cunningham M.P.
In the stroke of a pen and the shackling of your broader investigation, your monocular vision and thoughtless disregard of an opportunity for phenomenal, genuine education, progression and welfare-focussed potential, has unarguably heralded the greatest, negative impact on canine welfare in Scotland for decades. Your ill-advised, emotionally charged and politically-motivated decision, has directly, deliberately, unashamedly and absolutely affected the lives and freedoms of dogs and owners throughout your country. Your actions are those of a Victorian mother, frustrated at her inability to achieve meaningful resolution – “If you can’t share nicely, you shall not share at all”.
You take counsel from a for-profit organisation; one proven to have desimated health and bastardised fitness and form for over a century, their justification being money, prestige and dishonouring the human priviledge of dominion over other animals, in pursuit of some kind of gross distortion for aesthetic preference. An organisation to which I have sold electronic collars to a judge, trainer and breeder.
And so to the RSPCA. a charity so plagued with concern and bruised by controversy; one only too obliging to publish stories of success and joy, yet not so fothcoming with statistics covering killings and justifications? A charity in which I stood and witnessed first-hand, electronic citronella spray collars being used and woefully inadequate staff-handling of dogs.
“The Mail on Sunday quoted Dawn Aubrey-Ward, a former inspector for the RSPCA, as saying large numbers of animals, particularly dogs, were put to sleep after being classed “unsuitable for rehoming”, a definition which could be widely drawn to include older animals, those needing veterinary care, dogs deemed “aggressive” or larger dogs which were “hard to home”.
The repetitious, intentional and wholly avoidable killing of another physically healthy animal, owing to it’s size, failure to respond to the narrow parameters of ‘acceptable’ training and difficulty to home? Necessary suffering?
Cruelty isn’t found in a tool.
Cruelty is found within an ignorant mind or a rotten soul.
Minds are changed through education, not legislation, and no amount of either can positively influence rot.
The term ‘unnecessary suffering’ is absolutely applicable to ANY action taken against another living being, where that action is unjustified in respect of it’s intended outcome.
‘Unnecessary suffering’ can only be accurately understood where ‘necessary suffering’ is clarified and agreed.
Delivering a 2-second electronic pulse to a dog for a failure to present a dumbell close enough to your crotch in pursuit of a competitive-ranking, is incomparable to the delivery of a 2-second electronic pulse to a dog in order to save it the experience of a bullet or a terminal needle, charged with a get-out-clause of ‘we did our best’ ; and save a lamb the experience of disembowelment. Yet the means are identical. The tool also, is identical.
The use of a head-collar as a dog contorts, claws and writhes in vain to rid itself of this ‘unnatural’ restraint upon seeing another dog/car/cat/squirrel … Necessary suffering?
The frustrative non-reward (found on the same continuum as aggression) of free-shaping during clicker training. Basically the harnessing and direction of a state of deliberately induced frustration within another living being, simply to perfect an act intended for public or personal gratification, of no necessary or practical benefit to the dog whatsoever.
The repeated ‘clack’ of an extending lead, as it’s wearer is jerked dead in their tracks, straining on hind legs in an act of clear, yet futile resistance again and again throughout 30 minutes worth of ‘exercise’. An accumulation of thousands upon thousands of ineffective, entirely-avoidable assaults against the throat, chest or muzzle of the recipient … Necessary suffering?
The grotesque appearance of a bloated victim of a ‘love via glutony’ mentaility, surrounded by hollow marrowbones, stuffed chew-toys and this morning’s untouched bowl of ‘kibble with a bit of chicken gravy’; struggling for breath despite a single-digit lifetime … Necessary suffering?
Bone and heart-shaped, nutrient-deficient, health-compromising rainbow-coloured, mass-manufactured ‘training treats your dog will LOVE!’ … Crating or confining a social animal during periods of wholly avoidable absence, or a lifetime of yelping and frantically scrabbling at the car windows as you ‘pop to the shops for 5 minutes’, despite their unmistakable show of angst … Necessary suffering?
“Electronic training collars destroy the human:animal bond”
That statement was given on the radio this morning.
It requires amendment.
“Human intent, negligence and ignorance destroy the human:animal bond”.
Unless my dogs are sorely mistaken?