I’m deep into chapter four of my PhD and the consequences of contagious livestock diseases and veterinary interventions are key to the veterinary journey.
In the past, decisions taken on animal health were based on protecting human health, while the welfare of the animals was a secondary consideration – if it was even considered at all.
This resonates with today’s situation with XL bulldogs, suggesting that, In 180 years, human activities in regulating animals appear not to have moved on at all.
Death on arrival
In the 1870s, the impact of contagious cattle disease was huge. Britain was unable to maintain its own production of cattle for the food chain, so live imports were common.
In a bid to prevent imported cattle from bringing diseases into the country, the government policy became to cull at the port on arrival, therefore cutting out the opportunity for live cattle to move to farms and spread disease. Plus, culled cattle could be butchered and sold straight away.
This caused some issues with land owners, who were missing out on the income from raising cattle on their land and then selling on to the food chain.
No improvement
What wasn’t considered here was that the disease itself was not being stopped. Animal welfare was not being improved as the disease was still active and the animals were being transported sick. We were merely stopping cattle movements to reduce the opportunities for contagion.
In true human-centric fashion, those who would miss out because of this regulation ensured that, for at least some time, culling at ports was not implemented.
We seem to be able to regulate animal actions better than human actions.
Crux of the issue
Fast forward to today and we are in the midst of the implementation of regulations for XL bullys.
This situation is of human design as this breed didn’t exist 30 years ago when breed-specific legislation came into effect as part of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991. The human response to being told to neuter and muzzle your dog was to create a nearly identical, but unregulated breed.
This brings us to the crux of the issue as I see it: bites are from stressed dogs, so why are we not legislating to have the dogs mental well-being improved?
Like the sick cows transported 180 years ago, the welfare of today’s XL bullys is not considered in the new legislation. A muzzle will not prevent the dog from feeling stressed or anxious, automatic neutering does not guarantee improved behaviour and it is a poor choice to stop these dogs from being bred.
Non-compliance
People who do not wish to comply with these regulations need to be seen out with their dog, the dog measured to see if it fits the criteria and then follow-up actions taken.
As this is a legal matter, then it’s also a matter for the police, who surely do not need further legislation that regulates animals, but not people, taking up their time.
I am so sad that lessons from 30 and 180 years ago on human actions to regulations that may inconvenience them have not yet been learned.
Leave a Reply