This post is going to come across as a bit of a rant or a bit patronising, so I apologise in advance – just off a 27 hour flight ☹
 
As you lot know, the research I carried out on dog bites in Ireland was published a few weeks ago. Since its publication there has been a lot of support, but also a lot of criticism, generally with the same theme – that, regardless of what peer reviewed scientific research says, Joe / Mary’s opinion trumps this research, and, despite what experts with years of studying and experience under their belt have to say, Mary and Joe are right, and the experts are wrong.
 
Now the journalists are jumping on the band wagon, taking my research, misinterpreting it, and publishing (incorrect) results of the study.
 
There’s something about dogs that makes everyone an expert! I’m no mechanic, I’ll believe what the mechanics say. I’m do medical expert, I’ll believe what the doctors have to say. I’m no historian, I’ll believe what the historians have to say.
However, if it’s a topic I’m super interested in, and I have the time, I will research the area more to educate myself.
 
Anyway, back to the issue at hand. I am still being met with two common strong opinions.
Group A, the “yeah, well, some breeds are made to do x, y, or z”.
And
Group B, the “No matter what you guys have to say, when one of THOSE big dogs go for you, they’ll do way more damage than a smaller dog”.
 
Let’s look at it with some common sense, shall we? (wow, I’m cranky today!!)

Do you feel nervous around scary dogs?
If so, please take a minute to read this.
So today I got a lovely email out of the blue which got me thinking!
Yelski, my first foster dog, was sent to Sweden 6 years ago, and his owner who adopted him just found me on Facebook and sent me the beautiful picture.
 
However, the first time I met Yelski I was petrified of him!!
Was he barking? No. Was he jumping up? No. Was he displaying any signs of aggression? No. So why was I scared? Because he was a pitbull (*likely American Staffordshire terrier).
 
When I first met Yelski I had been working with dogs for about 4 years, and had been studying dogs, and dog behaviour for several years. I had worked with dogs of all shapes and sizes, and was pretty confident in my knowledge that I would know how to spot a dog that was likely to bite.
 
I had gotten on to Dog Action Welfare Group to let them know that I had the space to foster a couple of dogs. They replied that they had two for me, Frank, a white German shepherd, and Yelski, a pitbull. I said great, and went about my day as they were not due to arrive until about 7pm.
I thought no more of it, and as 7pm ticked ever closer, I finished up my cleaning and waited for the bell to go. Once the dogs arrived, I opened the door with a smile on my face.
 
The instant I looked at Yelski my blood went cold. My mind went in to autopilot and I remember a voice in my head saying “don’t look him in the eye, don’t look him in the eye”. I tried to have a normal conversation with the lady who dropped them off, but inside I was panicking.
 

​Creedons College Press Release
 
A newly published scientific research paper in the Irish Veterinary Journal suggests that Ireland’s approach to targeting dog breeds to protect the public as not having any scientific basis, but could also be making things much worse.
 
The work was conducted by Nanci Creedon from Creedons College and Dr. Páraic Ó Súilleabháin from the School of Psychology at the National University of Ireland, Galway. They examined differences in dog bites from legislated and non-legislated dog breeds of similar size in Ireland.
 
The researchers did not find any differences between legislated and non-legislated dog breeds for the type of bite inflicted, and the medical treatment required after the bite. The researchers highlighted that when considering existing research showing no differences in aggression between legislated and non-legislated dog breeds, no apparent basis exists which would justify targeting specific dog breeds as being more dangerous than others. 
 
Nanci Creedon said: “This gives weight to calls to re-assess the use of breed-specific legislation. This suggests that more appropriate dog-bite prevention be put in place which focuses on education, owner responsibility, and fair assessment of reported dogs. While gathering information for this study it became evident that data from dog bite incidents is not being collected. This uncollected data could provide invaluable information to gain insight on how to prevent future bites. I would encourage the government to review the absence of appropriate investigation post-bite incident.”
 
While the study did not observe a scientific basis for breed-specific legislation, the researchers also investigated if its introduction may have other consequences. The study found that dog breeds not legislated for were more likely than legislated breeds to bite with the owner present on own property, and on a business property. The study also found that dog-bite victims were more likely to report legislated dog breeds as angrier and less afraid when biting compared to bites from non-legislated dog breeds.
 
Researchers concluded that this is consistent with the prediction that people perceive a greater threat to legislated breeds and a correspondingly lesser risk related to non-legislated dog breeds. In other words, people may think non-legislated breeds are safer, more docile and tolerant than legislated breeds due to their non-legislated status.
 
The authors found that this was supported when investigating the reporting of dog bites to authorities. They found that non-legislated dog breeds were significantly less likely to be reported to any authorities both before, and after the bite occurred. The authors suggested aside from having a very serious effect of not identifying biting dogs, this may also be reinforcing the perceptions some authorities have in relation to legislated dog breeds.
 
The study also highlights other consequences with the introduction of breed-specific legislation in Ireland, which includes; animal welfare concerns due to some pounds not rehoming and accepting surrenders of legislated dog breeds, disability/assistance dogs of these breeds not being exempt from restrictions, and owner housing restrictions among others.
 
Dr. Páraic Ó Súilleabháin added: “This work provides good scientific evidence to explain why the use of breed-specific legislation to protect the public from dangerous dogs may in fact be making things much worse. The increased stereotype of risk to one group of breeds, and the lack of perceived risk associated with other breeds appear to be two sides to the same counterproductive coin, and neither identify a potentially dangerous dog. This research raises very serious concerns regarding the distinct bias in the reporting of dog bites from non-legislated breeds”.
 
How to cite article: Creedon, N., & Ó’Súilleabháin, P.S. (2017). Dog bite injuries to humans and the use of breed-specific legislation: A comparison of bites from legislated and non-legislated dog breeds. Irish Veterinary Journal, DOI: 10.1186/s13620-017-0101-1
 
Full article available https://irishvetjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13620-017-0101-1:
 

Loco came in to my life at probably the worst time! I had just finished work on my house, was about to move my business in to a brand new premises, and was committed to lots of upcoming events.
 
However, when a friend of mine showed me the picture of Loco at a local animal charity Dog Action Welfare Group, his big sad eyes said “help me” and I was hooked! 
 

Intrigued by the title? Read on! 


So over the weekend I actually took some time off work and watched TV! Wild, I know! 

However, two particular pieces of 'entertainment' found their way in to my working-mode train of thoughts. 

CAN WE TALK ABOUT GUILTY DOGS FOR A MINUTE?!

YouTube is full of ‘funny’ videos of guilty dogs. Full of them! It’s like people can’t get enough of dogs appearing to feel remorseful for a behaviour they carried out earlier in the day.
While I am NOT judging people for finding these videos funny when they don’t fully understand them, I AM here to explain these videos from the dogs point of view.
First and foremost, here comes one of the MOST important pieces of information that ALL dog owners need to know, but don’t. The THREE SECOND RULE.
There have been studies investigating how much time can pass between a dog doing a behaviour and the consequence of that behaviour occurring. We need to know this to know how to help dogs learn.
The studies have found that if the dog begins a behaviour and the instant they do it, a consequence happens then there is 100% association between ‘I put bum on floor so I got a treat’.
If the dog carries out a behaviour and 1 second later the consequence occurs there is a 60% association, “I put my bum on the floor and I think I got a treat for it”.
If the dog carries out a behaviour and 2 seconds later the consequence occurs there is 20% association “I think I might have gotten a treat for putting my bum on the floor”.
If the dog carried out a behaviour and 3 or more seconds later the consequence occurs there is NO association. “Hey, I just got a free treat!!”.
 
So, back to the videos. These videos of guilty dogs occur sometime after the behaviour. The owner returns home, dog says hi, then all of a sudden mum or dad has turned in to a scary monster for ABSOLUTELY NO REASON.
The behaviours they carry out, explained below, do not show guilt, but instead are the dogs attempt to say ‘please don’t hurt me’. The dog is learning that the human is completely unpredictable, will sometimes turn and behave in a threatening manner, and cannot be fully trusted.
Besides the fact that this is extremely unfair on the dog (look at the below video and imagine that is a three year old child showing the behaviours the dog shows), the human safety element needs to be remembered too. As the dog begins to learn that the human can be a scary threat we are increasing the possibility that the dog will be pushed too far and may bite. Their trust in the humans ability to protect them is damaged and the dog may learn to rely on themselves for protection.
Also, the dog may be intimidated by the adult and decide I cannot fight back because they are big and scary. However, the child in the home may watch mum and dad do this to their dog, then copy the behaviour. As the dog is less likely to be intimidated by the child they may return the challenge and again, a bite could occur.
Have a read of the below explanations of the dogs communication and please take a moment to think about what the dog is learning in these videos – also – DON’T TRY THIS AT HOME ;)
 
Head Turn – dog turns head away from stimulus it does not want to interact with – “I don’t see you”

Check In – Dog looks to the person with the camera for assistance. As dogs are an almost ‘manmade’ species they will look to humans for assistance when needed (hand reared wolves won’t)

Moon Crested Eyes – the whites of the dogs eyes are visible. This is a side effect of when dogs are in a heightened state. In this video it is likely to be due to attempting to turn its head away from the thing it is scared of (lady) while also trying to watch her actions in case she ‘attacks’.

Facial Tension – You can see that the muscles in the dogs head and face are tight, seen when dogs are stressed

Ears Back – Ears pinned back are a sign of avoidance and also a sign that they do not want to challenge or fight (often you will see ears back in a greeting too so the dog can communicate ‘hi, I’m not a threat’). In stressful experiences you will see ears back to show non challenging signals and also to listen for any potential additional threats approaching from behind.

Head lowered when turning toward lady. Attempting to appear small and vulnerable – “Please don’t hurt me”

Slow Movement. Dogs will do this when they want to be ‘invisible’ and not draw attention to themselves.

Tail Tuck. This dogs tail is not fully tucked, but hangs lower than normal carriage. This is a defensive sign, showing that the dog feels vulnerable.

Vigilance. The dog remains vigilant of the bread handler after it enters the bed – the dog will continue to watch anything that they perceive as a threat.  

Gutted to hear that it is now assumed that Finn (Bring Finn Home) was shot by a farmer soon after he went missing.
This is devastating for his family.
It is vital to clarify the legislation here. Despite what people say it is NOT LEGAL for a farmer to shoot a dog, whether or not it is worrying livestock.
The legislation states that if a dog is worrying stock then the LEGAL option is to seize the dog and bring it to the guards / the guards can seize the dog.
The legislation states that if you ILLEGALLY shoot a dog then you can use the fact that the dog was worrying livestock as part of your defence.
However, the life of the livestock is equally as important as the dog, and if the dog is in fact a danger to the livestock and the farmer cannot safely seize the dog then I can see why they may see no option other than shooting the dog.
Perhaps a solution here may be rubber bullets for farmers?
The only solution is responsible ownership, not letting your dog off leash around livestock, ensuring your dog is secure and cannot escape (particularly if living near livestock) and, if you think your dog may be around livestock then it is VITAL to work on DESENSITISATION EXERCISES so that your dog has no desire to chase the livestock.
This video may help with teaching your dog to ignore livestock.
My thoughts go out to Finn's family.

​I had a client recently who had adopted a dog. The dog had seen a trainer pre-adoption, and to find out as much as I could about the trainer I asked about what kind of trainer, and what methods were used.
His response was 'a dog trainer, sure aren't all trainers the same?'.
This is an assumption that many have, and it's assumed that if someone is advertising as a dog trainer they must be skilled and qualified.
This sadly is not the case. Dog trainers vary to such extremes that in far too many cases dogs that come to me after seeing a trainer are in a much worse situation than they would be if they had never seen that trainer.
If you are handing over hard earned money, and putting your precious dog in the hands of another, then you need to be 100% sure that this is the right dog trainer.
Decent qualifications are essential.
Many have been 'working with dogs all their lives'. Unfortunately this is the response that scares me the most. Not always, but in most cases, this line is a clear indication that this trainer has not been paying attention to the gigantic leaps forward the dog behaviour industry has made in recent decades thanks to the dedication of many behavioural researchers. Dog trainers with qualifications who continue to upskill, attend seminars, and read up on new research are likely to be following the most up to date methods which are the most likely to succeed.
Certification is essential.
It’s one thing thinking that you are a competent, knowledgeable dog trainer. It is another thing if an independent body stands over you and, after assessment, deem you worthy of becoming a certified member (www.apdt.ie is the only Irish certifying body in the industry. I am also a certified dog trainer with CCPDT and a certified behaviourist with IAABC and AABP).
Methods are vital.
If a dog trainer uses any of the methods in the below video, then you MUST NOT USE THEM. Dog training has advanced so much in the past several decades that no educated trainer worth their salt would dream of using any techniques that upset, frighten or hurt the dog they are working with. We don’t need to. Such methods cause more harm than good, and we have more humane ways to train.
The video mentions ‘flooding’ several times. This is exposing the dog to something above their coping threshold. The dog is often then punished, or continue to be exposed to the thing until they stop the unwanted behaviour. This often results in a dog shutting down. They still hate the thing that causes the reaction (dogs / people / traffic and so on) but they have learned that their attempts to deal with this no longer work due to the flooding, so they just shut down, do nothing, and hope that it will end soon.
This may result in the end of the unwanted behaviour, but no doubt other fallout will occur. The dog may shut down when the trainer exposes them to other dogs, but when their elderly owner attempts the same methods the dog decides that no way will they allow the flooding to occur again and so on.
 
The moral of this video is to open your eyes. Just because the person in a position of power says this is how to train your dog it is vitally important that the public realise that these methods are wrong, there are better, safer and more humane ways to train if you find yourself a qualified, competent trainer!
 

Let me explain how these collars work from a learning viewpoint. 
 

The new collar is put on the dog. It feels a little heavy, but, hey, they’re used to wearing a collar so they go about their business and soon forget they are wearing it.
 
Next, somebody approaches their land, so the dog does its normal job of alerting its humans that someone is approaching.
 
WHACK!!! Out of nowhere they get a blow to the neck. The Whack can be the shock, a squirt of something disgusting right in to their face that makes them cough, sneeze and hurts their throat, or a frightening noise that upsets the dog.
They have no idea where it came from, or how to avoid it, but all they know is that when they saw the person approaching, and decided that person had become enough of a threat to them or their family that they needed to bark, OUCH!!
 
Later, someone approaches again. This time the dog may become aware of the sensation of the vibration, but it’s likely the dog will pay little attention to it because they are busy doing their job of warning away the stranger. Again, the stranger comes close enough for them to feel threatened, and again, WHACK!!!
 
After a couple of repetitions of this the dog will start to associate the vibration as a warning that the whack is imminent.
They will also, and this is important, associate the approaching person as the cause of the warning and the whack.
 
As time goes on the dog will learn (in many cases) that even if you fear the person approaching, or feel that they might be a threat to your family, you dare not bark because then the person will cause a WHACK to your neck.
 
Now the vibration has become the bully holding their fist up to their victim’s face. Maybe the victim will stay quiet because the threat of a punch is enough to frighten them in to silence. Maybe the victim will speak out (bark) every now and again, and the WHACK will come. Either way, the whack, or the threat of the whack is enough to keep the dog in a stressful state and continue to strengthen their fear and dislike of approaching people.
 
When the marketing companies advertise electric shock collars as ‘only giving a mild vibration to stop the bark’ they forget about the fall out. If the vibration stops the dog from barking, then we know that they are so afraid of the WHACK that they remain silent and do not tell the scary person approaching to go away.
IF the collar was not frightening the dog, the dog would continue to bark. If learning occurs, the dog learns to stay quiet, yes, this is true, but the dog also learns to fear the person approaching and lives in a world where the threat of a WHACK is ever present. Not the world I want my dogs to live in!
 
 

Currently the enforcement of the Control of Dogs Act lies with the dog wardens. While wardens do their best with extremely limited resources, they have NO formal training, there is NO protocol for investigating reports of aggressive dogs, and no training or qualifications in understanding dog behaviour.

I strongly believe that the establishment of a National Dog Bite Prevention Association would be a pioneering approach to reducing dog bites, and many other countries would follow suit.

The NDBPA would be responsible for many of the below of bite prevention measures, and would undergo rigorous training and continual development, along with regular assessment to ensure that we have competent, qualified, knowledgeable and experienced persons in place to work on bite prevention.
​

Every single website, article, review panel and expert strongly recommends education as a dog bite preventative measure.
What does this mean?
Education can teach children how to assess dogs body language to determine if the dog needs space (a study from Lincoln University found that many young children perceive a dog growl as a smile).
Education can teach children what to do if a dog does become aggressive. Often children run and shout when afraid of the dog which inevitably leads to the dog chasing, there are many great techniques used to teach children how to respond appropriately, and safely.
​Education can teach dog owners how to ensure that their dogs grow up to become happy, friendly dogs that do not bite. 
Education can teach dog owners how to respond when they notice that their dog has a behaviour problem that could potentially lead to a bite.
Education can teach postmen, delivery men, and the general public how to behave around dogs to remain safe. 

A National Dog Bite Prevention Week can highlight what research tells us about dog bites, and dog behaviour. The campaign could highlight several pieces of advice to begin changing untrue myths about dogs, and begin to turn the tide so that the Irish public are 'in the know' about dog behaviour and care.
​

This one is controversial because it's assumed that people won't like it.
Tough.
People don't like taking eye tests when applying for a driving licence, people don't like taking leaving certificate exams, people don't like having to be over a certain height to ride a roller coaster.
If theory tests were introduced we would see several things happening...

a) The cost of getting the book or DVD, along with the cost of taking the test will deter potential dog owners who aren't willing to put money in to their dog ownership (or possibly cannot afford a dog). Dogs are expensive, vet checks, insurance, good food and so on costs money. That's the truth of it. It costs money to own a dog. It's not a 'right' to own a dog in the same way as it is not a 'right' to own a car. You need to be able to afford it, and you need to know what you are doing. 
b) The material in the dog licence theory test books and DVD's will focus on the many important topics that dog owners need to know. From socialising a puppy, to responsible dog ownership, from understanding dog body language to understanding the dangerous side effects to using painful training tools. All of this information needs to be understood before owning a dog. 
c) Owning a dog without a licence will lead to fines. Fines will then lead to income that can be re-invested in bite prevention. 

There are some very interesting studies correlating the ownership of dangerous dogs (dogs that have caused harm) with owners that are 3 times more likely to have been convicted on a charge of domestic violence, 14.1 times more likely to be convicted of crimes involving alcohol, 2.6 times more likely to have been convicted of domestic violence and so on.

A dog can be used as a weapon in the wrong hands, big or small.

Again, owning a dog is not a right, it is a responsibility. The manner in which a dog is handled and trained can have a massive impact on how that dog then behaves. While it is important not to stereotype all convicted criminals, the studies show the link between criminals and dangerous dogs, and this must be taken seriously. 

So many dog bites occur because, at the core of the motivation, the dog felt that it's survival was threatened.
​Study after study shows that the use of positive punishment, inflicting pain, fear or discomfort on to a dog (or any animal) will increase the probability of aggressive behaviour.
However, many dog trainers use punishment based tools day in, day out, to attempt to treat a behaviour problem.
I have worked with many dogs after they have worked with a punishment based trainer, and hands down, it has made the behaviour worse.
Unfortunately dog training is not regulated.
There are many dog trainers out there without any formal qualifications, and their ability to train is based on the fact that they have experience. However, experience doing things incorrectly does not mean the trainer is competent. 
I strongly believe that the ability to train dogs correctly, safely and effectively requires a thorough understanding of the brain, the nervous system, the endocrine system, learning theory and correct understanding of different signalling and body language.

Regulating the dog training industry, and putting guidelines including a complete ban on aversive training methods would go a long way in helping dog owners gain access to the correct training advice, and begin to see a substantial reduction in fear or pain based training methods, which in turn will result in more confident, secure dogs which will be less likely to bite. 

Every single dog bite incident is an opportunity to learn to minimise the likelihood of the bite happening again.
Data that could be collected from victim, witness, and dog owner statements along with evidence from the incident, can all help us to understand dog bites so much better, and through this understanding we can continue to introduce more effective bite prevention measures.

Unfortunately, in many dog bite incidents in Ireland either nothing changes or the dog is put to sleep and that is considered to be the 'end of the matter'.

A trained NDBPA team could investigate the incident, determine the outcome for the dog after assessment (of course in many cases the recommendations of the NDBPA will be to euthanise the dog, but only after it has been assessed, and only if the investigation determines that the dog poses a serious risk to society). 
This fair assessment will lead to more reporting of dog bite incidents, as it will be understood that a serious, fair investigation will take place. 

Dogs born in commercial dog breeding establishments are significantly more likely to show aggressive behaviours than dogs born through responsible breeding measures.
Ignoring all the other aspects of puppy farms, this alone should be enough reason for society to clamp down on commercial dog breeding establishments. 

In a world that has sophisticated CCTV systems, alarm systems, security firms and so on, the use of dogs for security is possibly unnecessary.
If trained correctly and humanely, dogs can display protective behaviours on cue. However, I have found that, in Ireland, a security dog is simply a nervous dog that behaves offensively aggressively when faced with a threat. This means that these dogs are afraid, and are quite likely to bite if approached. 
This is not OK.
These dogs are stressed, live in fear, and are a serious risk to unsuspecting members of the public.
the use of dogs for security measures needs to be at least reviewed, and ideally legislation put in place.
​

To say there is no such thing as bad dogs, just bad owners, is instantly dismissing the fact that many, many factors contribute to a dogs behaviour. 
Many dogs that bite have very loving, caring, responsible owners. 
However, should a dog owner be aware that their dog poses a threat, and should they not take appropriate measures in a timely manner, then these owners are acting irresponsibly and should face serious repercussion. 
The establishment of a NDBPA means that there will be members who can investigate and assess reports of aggressive dogs, and provide guidelines that the owner must follow. Breach of said guidelines could result in punishment. 
The investigation should be at the dog owners cost unless the dog is determined to be well behaved and the report unwarranted. 

Many aggressive behaviours and / or bites go unreported.
Often this is for the same reasons - they do not want to cause aggravation between themselves and a neighbour, they don't want the dog to be put to sleep, or they assume 'nothing will happen'. 
If the reporter was assured that a NDPBA investigator would visit the dog's home by chance, if the investigation was fair, and if the outcome was practical (mandatory training and review in 3 months / mandatory muzzling / dog must be kept on private property etc.) then it is likely that the general public would have much more confidence in reporting such dogs. 

If mandatory pet insurance was introduced, insurance companies could be responsible for covering the cost of fines where the owner can not. Mandatory insurance would also cover the cost of behaviour modification training, and the cost of medical expenses incurred.
Pet insurance could also cover the costs of NDBPA investigations.
Pet insurance would mean that animals in pain could be treated sooner, and to a higher standard as many bites involve dogs that are suffering from some painful condition. 

I have found that in many dog bite incidents the dogs are on public property without their owner.
These dogs are then untraceable, and the owners are unaware of their dogs behaviour.
Clamping down on stray dogs, and fining the owners, should see a reduction in stray dogs, and also a reduction in irresponsible dog owners as the 'hassle' of owning a dog becomes greater. 

These are just some  suggestions.
More can be made.
Looking at other countries can provide inspiration for other possible ideas.
The bottom line is, we need to do something. 
And soon. 

I am publicly calling on the Cavan County Council to reject Ray Cullivan’s bid for retention permission for his puppy farm in Poles, Co. Cavan.
*This is an opportunity for the people in power to make a statement that Ireland will no longer tolerate the sale of unhealthy dogs, and as a nation of animal lovers, we expect a much higher standard of physical and mental care for breeding dogs and their pups*
 
Whilst I will not comment on the fact that Ray Cullivan was in breach of the law when breeding dogs without planning permission, nor will I call for his accounts to be investigated (which they should), I will leave that to those who know more, the grounds of my objection is based on the fact that puppy farm dogs are much more prone to dangerous behavioural and medical complications, and there for any pup that is sold from such an environment is ripping off the buyer.
 
So many people are fooled into purchasing pups from such establishments by cunning tricks where such pups are taken from their living environment (which would turn off any perspective buyer) and are instead purchased from a family home, or the back of a car, so the buyers are oblivious to the environment from which the pup spent their precious early weeks.
The pup’s parents are rarely seen, and the truth behind the day to day life of the parents is, of course, not disclosed.
 
Puppy farms also pose a risk to society. The below studies have shown, time and time again, that puppies from puppy farm environments are more fearful and more aggressive than pups from responsible sources, resulting in more risk of dog bite to the general public.
 
Cavan County Council vets have reported that there is no welfare concern for the dogs on site. I would respectfully ask those vets to explain where they acquired their behaviour qualifications, and how they behaviourally assessed all of the dogs on site to determine their mental health.
 
I would like to make a number of points, based on scientific published research, to educate those who are less informed on the fallout of the puppy farm environment for the dogs involved.
(PLEASE NOTE – WHILE MANY OF THE BELOW STUDIES ARE BASED ON UK DOGS, THE RSPCA ESTIMATE THAT EACH YEAR 40,000 PUPS ARE SHIPPED FROM IRELAND TO ENGLAND)
 
 
 
HealthA survey carried out on over 2000 dogs in the UK found the following statistics

• Half of puppies (49%) bought online, without being seen first, fall sick, and around 1 in 5 puppies (17%) end up with serious gastrointestinal problems.
• Almost 1 in 5 people (18%) who bought a puppy online or from a newspaper advert are forced to spend between £500 and £1,000 on vet bills in the first six months of the puppy’s life – often more than the original cost of the puppy.
• More than a third of people (37%) who ended up with a sick puppy after buying online or from a newspaper advert experienced financial problems due to treatment costs, and 35% suffered from emotional problems.
• More than a third of puppies (37%) bought online or from a newspaper advert without being seen first were bought as a spur of the moment decision, with almost two-thirds (60%) being bought solely because of the way they looked.
• Buying a puppy from a responsible breeder can cost owners 18% less in unplanned veterinary fees, and puppies are 23% less likely to need to visit the vet.

BBC Scotland investigated the trade from Ireland to Scotland and found that 20% of the pups bought on the internet will die within 6 months (BBC Scotland. 2015. The Dog Factory).
 
 

 
BehaviourA study by Franklin McMillan behaviourally evaluated a large sample of American dog owners comparing dogs bought from stores (puppy farm pups) to dogs bought from responsible breeders. 
Dogs bred for commercial profit are significantly more likely to show greater aggression towards family members, unfamiliar people, and other dogs than pups from responsible breeders.
Commercially bred pups are more likely to show greater fear of other dogs and non-threatening things than pups from responsible breeders.
Commercially bred dogs are more likely to show separation-related problems and house soiling than responsibly bred dogs. 
Commercially bred pups are more likely to show the following behaviour problems – aggression, house soiling, body licking and separation anxiety.
Puppy farm dogs are less trainable than dogs from responsible breeders.
Puppy ream dogs have less favourable behaviour and temperament scores than puppies from responsible breeders.

And What About the Parents?In relation to ex-breeding stock, the adult dogs who are rehomed after being used as breeding stock show significantly higher rates of fear, house soiling, compulsive staring (zoning out), are less trainable, and are significantly less likely to show signs of excitement, energy, chasing or aggression. This study concludes that the deprived life, where the dog could not escape from its situation has resulted in the dog developing a coping mechanism of ‘shutting down’. (McMillan et al 2011)
 
In my career as a dog behaviour consultant I work with dogs who have behaviour problems on a daily basis.
In my experience, the above studies are true. In Ireland, many dog owners are not aware that they have purchased a dog from a puppy farm until I ask the right questions and make a connection. These owners have been tricked in to buying a dog with many behaviour problems.
The early weeks of a pup’s development (weeks 3-12) are the vital weeks that help develop that dog and its temperament. A pup that spends these weeks locked in a barn or shed is not getting exposure to the essential socialisation and capitalisation experiences that a well-bred pup will.
Fundamentally, the domestic dog is a species that man has created. At it’s very core, a dog is an animal that needs to human company to be able to express natural behaviours. During weeks 3-12 pups should be exposed to the normal life stimuli – TV, microwave ping, central heating, walking on tiles, on carpet and on wood, trips in the car, meeting children, family and friends. Smelling new scents, hearing new sounds, experiences that will help to build that pup into a well-adjusted, happy, healthy adult dog.
Early environment strongly influences the emotional stability of puppies later in life, with pups from responsible breeders less vocal and distressed when they join their new home, and much calmer in their new environment. Deliberate inclusion of gentle exposures to new stimuli, and handling very much helps the emotional development, and the welfare, of the pups (Gazzano).
 
We need to listen to science. Puppy farms are awful for puppies, awful for the parents, and result in new dog owners being sold a ‘product’ that is not fit for purpose. These pups are more likely to DIE and more likely to BITE.
Yet for the sake of lining the pockets of these individuals our puppy farm economy is booming. Are they paying their taxes? Are they registered for VAT? Are they following the Dog Breeding Establishment Act legislation? Seems not.



References
Hsu, Y. and Serpell, J.A., 2003. Development and validation of a questionnaire for measuring behavior and temperament traits in pet dogs.Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, 223(9), pp.1293-1300.
McMillan, F.D., Duffy, D.L. and Serpell, J.A., 2011. Mental health of dogs formerly used as ‘breeding stock’in commercial breeding establishments.Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 135(1), pp.86-94.
McMillan, Franklin D., et al. "Differences in behavioral characteristics between dogs obtained as puppies from pet stores and those obtained from noncommercial breeders." Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 242.10 (2013): 1359-1363.
Pirrone, F., Pierantoni, L., Pastorino, G.Q. and Albertini, M., 2016. Owner-reported aggressive behavior towards familiar people may be a more prominent occurrence in pet shop-traded dogs. Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research, 11, pp.13-17.
Gazzano, A., Mariti, C., Notari, L., Sighieri, C. and McBride, E.A. (2008) Effects of early gentling and early environment on emotional development of puppies. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 110, (3-4), 294-304.
Do puppies from ‘puppy farms’ [puppy mills] show more temperament and behavioural problems than if acquired from other sources? Using CBARQ to assess” Rebecca Gray, Catherine Douglas, Sophie Butler and James Serpell, Presented at British Society of Animal Science “Annual Conference”, Chester, UK, 6th April 2016. - http://www.ncl.ac.uk/press/news/2016/05/puppyfarms/
The Humane Society of the United States, "Veterinary Problems in Puppy Mill Dogs" (2012). HSUS Puppy Mill Research, Reports, and Facts Sheets. Paper 7
BBC Scotland. 2015. The Dog Factoryf
https://www.vettimes.co.uk/news/survey-highlights-welfare-concern-of-modern-puppy-buying-habits/?utm_source=Vetsonline+Newsletters&utm_campaign=ef1b8b9376-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_fe3d844056-ef1b8b9376-82610245
​

'Ireland is the puppy farm capitol of Europe' - proud? thought not.
​Click below to read on.

What does €22,983.95 mean to you?! Click read more to find out what it means to me!

Are you as confused about the 'dog behaviourist' title as everyone else? Click read more to find out what a true certified dog behaviour consultant is!

​Top Tips for HOT DOGS this summer

The good weather is FINALLY here, and we're all delighted, but is your dog ready? 

Every year dogs across Ireland are rushed to emergency rooms suffering heat stroke and burns on our hotter days, and unfortunately many don't make it home.

Dog expert Nanci Creedon, of Creedons College shares her top tips for keeping your canine cool this summer.

​I love a good comedian as much as the next person, and Amy Schumer is my new favourite lol-girl,so when a youtube video showed up of Amy Schumer doing a skit on doggie daycare dog owners, I just had to click.

Anyone who knows me knows how pathetically obsessed I am with assessing dog bites, and dog bite prevention.... it's my thing!

I'm about to launch a massive research project into dog bites in Ireland, and amidst my research I came across a really interesting study.


​Click below to find out more...

Anyone who knows me knows I abso-frickin-lutely love my job. Its my hobby, my passion, and at this stage has also become my R&R!

This weekend, as a 'treat' I am at a 3 day conference in London by the wonderful Dr. Karen Overall, and I'm literally still smiling on the inside. ​

We all worry about kids and online bullying when using the internet, right?

Well when are we going to turn around and look at ourselves? Businesses are falling apart and lives are being literally destroyed at the mercy of stories going 'viral' and each and every person who shared, commented or retweeted the story go on with their lives unaffected and unaware of the trouble that has been caused. I like to think that I've done my best to avoid jumping on band wagons and have tried to remember that there are always two sides of every story. 

Recently I had a bit of a moral dilemma. 
​

​Guess what? Halloween can be really really scary!! Duh, right?

Great, glad you agree.

Now, what's your contingency plan for your pooch?

​As a dog trainer and behaviour consultant, every 5th client tells me that their dog is 'dominant', to which I have to bite my tongue. I know what they are implying, that in certain situations their dog is a little boisterous, or perhaps over confident, or perhaps has learnt that using brute forge helps him to get what he wants.

​Often allowing your dog to free feed (that is, pick and choose when they eat) can lead to many problems and side effects.

If food is always available, it loses value to the dog, and they can become disinterested in eating and fussy eaters. This can lead to problems for dog owners as they will constantly worry has the dog eaten / its difficult to monitor the dogs uptake.