To think we're about to see an influx of XL Bully attacks after a rehoming free for all?

[SeattleSpacePlane]

So I know the ban is about to come in. Plenty for it, many against it. Not trying to start a debate about that!

Yesterday someone on my FB shared a post from a woman who was offering to rehome an XL to save it before the ban came in. Someone commented with a group for rehoming XLs before it's too late and banned and I clicked on it for a look.

I was absolutely gobsmacked by the posts on the group. Hundreds of posts going back weeks of XLs needing new homes (I suppose expected) - but a VERY high and panicked volume of posts over the past few days, as the ban approaches.

Lots of pictures of dogs with !!URGENT!! rehoming requests. From people asking on behalf of their friend, because their HA just told them XLs are banned under their tenancy, for the XL they just found abandoned behind Tesco, because they bred an XL litter this year and a buyer has just dumped an 8 month old pup back with them. Lots of reasons. Incredibly sad for the dogs, none of this is of their making.

But it's the reaponses. Comments and comments from people offering to rehome an XL to save them. Highlights were 'willing to take one but must be good with children as I have a 5 year old'. 'I wish I could have both but I'm in a flat so one is my limit, please contact me'. 'I have an XL already who is brilliant with the kids, happy to add another poor baby to our pack'.

Dogs are currently being panic-rehomed all over the Country. People are offering their services to transport the XL from Devon to the family in Yorkshire who've agreed to take it. No home checks, no behavioural checks of the dogs, people aren't even meeting the dog they're agreeing to home. Lots and LOTS being shipped to Scotland in particular where there's no ban.

It's truly frightening the amount of people with young dc agreeing to blindly rehome an XL to save them. I wouldn't rehome a bloody Yorkie without meeting the dog first never mind an XL!

This is going to end in tragedy, surely?

AIBU to think the ban on privately rehoming them should have been immediate at point of announcement to prevent this madness? And also that, sadly, we're likely to be reading several tragic stories in the coming weeks about one of these panic-rehomed dogs turning?

Why? Why are they in a horrible position?

They shouldn’t have taken in these dangerous animals if they have a policy of not putting down dogs. To be honest, permanent life in a shelter sounds cruel to me. I assume - I hope - these dogs are all caged. They’d be better off put down.

As for all the owners being scum and drug dealers, no doubt some are and some aren’t. But all of them are very foolish getting these powerful, vicious dogs.

What do you suggest they do, leave them tied to the gate? Thats how many have ended up in rescue in the first place.

I suggest they humanely kill them.

@WhatsTheUseOfWorrying
These dogs have likely been at the shelter for several months already at least, as they don't consider rehoming until the dogs have been nursed back to health (most arrive in a physical state; only a small proportion arrive as healthy and well cared for dogs) and assessed/investigated for suitability for adoption. This involves lengthy rehabilitation, medical treatment and loving care in a lot of cases.

This kneejerk legislation was only announced, what, eight weeks ago?

I doubt it’s that simple if they are charities; they will have been set up with certain principles.

Yes, and I’m aware that the pp said it was a no-kill shelter. But she said the shelter had been put in a horrible position because they have to look after these dogs for life. (I think the dogs are actually in the worse position, thanks to the shelter.)

My point is that they have created this problem by taking the dogs in the first place, knowing that they have that no-kill policy. In which case they’ll have to change policy or put up with their decision to accept these wretched dogs.

No. They are in a horrible position because they can now help fewer dogs, and because they cannot rehome these dogs who may be perfectly rehomable. They can't even foster them. So a dog who is responding well to training, has no known reactivity, gets along with other dogs, has never been aggressive and gets along beautifully with shelter workers and volunteers... this dog can never now go and find and bond with their own person and live in their own home. I can't explain it to you why it is a tragedy if you lack the compassion to understand.

Suggesting that they start killing healthy dogs only shows your lack of understanding, tbh. Their whole remit is to rescue, rehabilitate, rehome-- very carefully and only when an applicant is truly suitable. The dogs have a good life while they are there at the rescue, with walks, food, training, socialisation and care. I am not worried for their welfare, but for the dogs that this shelter won't have the space for.

I think you’ve overlooked one teeny, tiny problem…this breed of dog has killed and mutilated so many people and other animals that the government has had to restrict them.

And there’s nothing compassionate about running what is basically a mini XL Bully zoo, but without any research and conservation benefits.

I really hope no workers at shelters are attacked by these monstrous dogs. But I strongly suspect they will be.

I really hope no workers at shelters are attacked by these monstrous dogs. But I strongly suspect they will be.

There's already one man dead in Dundee. Kennels rather than rescue but nevertheless.

Oh my god. Is that recent?

I’ve found a report of the death. It’s a year ago. Poor man.

The article says he’d worked with dogs for 20 years.

It was in 2022:

https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/scottish-news/9678110/dundee-killer-dog-tragedy-attacks-court/

I really hope no workers at shelters are attacked by these monstrous dogs. But I strongly suspect they will be.

Strange. I get the impression you'd be delighted.

Thank you.

Why?

The intention to ban was announced 16 weeks ago - and even many of those who are being vaunted as great owners seem to have failed to take any steps toward muzzle training, or indeed in many cases I’ve seen not even bothered to acquire muzzles until after the actual deadline for needing them had passed.🙄

That's an ugly looking fecker of a dog.
the demented eyes and that slash of a mouth..

Poor bloke.

The "great owners" are the 4000+ who have already applied for exemption certificates and have accepted the conditions.

The rest are the utterly shite owners who I think are the root of the problem. But saying that you think it's an owner problem and that breed-based measures are inherently flawed goes down like a cup of cold sick on this thread.

Unfortunately a small number of those people who have appeared to have accepted the conditions acrually have not. I would say I have seen 5-10 people openly walking their XLs without muzzles and bragging about it on social media along with videos.

Well, trusting in the diligence of XL Bully owners, in their ability to control XLs in a frenzy and in the good nature of these dogs hasn’t been a roaring success so far, has it?

Every single XL I've seen this week has been muzzled and on a lead. I admit even I was getting tangled up a bit in the "shit thuggish owners" assumptions so have been pleasantly surprised to see stereotypical knobhead owners being responsible.

it's like it's changed interactions a bit round here too. I live in an extremely rough area, and now there's a lot more little eye rolls and smiles between what might be dodgy characters with these dogs. I've exchanged "mornings" with people I'd usually ignore, other half has said the same. Took my dog out the other day (I go to the posh bit 😬) and saw 2 with very young owners sponsored by North Face chatting away to a guy who I always thought was a bit stuck up. It's gone a bit weird tbh.

You seem to be assuming that the issue was with those dogs belong to the owners who are complying with the act, rather than the shitty ones who are failing to comply and offloading their dogs

I do not share that assumption.

I’m assuming it’s any owner of an XL Bully. These dogs cannot be controlled by anyone when they attack.

I’m talking about the history of XL attacks, not just the position after the rules came into force.

The offloading of dogs should never have been allowed and the ban on rehoming should have been immediate with a lead-in period for shelters only, that would have prevented the mass exodus to Scotland.

I saw a video on my feed yesterday of a woman who has sent her "much loved" Bully to Scotland to live with a relative on the basis that the government want her put to sleep so she (the owner) has "been cruel to be kind". No thought of just applying for the exemption and muzzle training her dog though. I looked at the rest of her feed which consists of videos about how misunderstood her dog is and that that people don't realise the reality of life with a reactive dog. Again no thought of the consequences of suddenly rehoming a reactive dog hundreds of miles away all so that it can continue to be walked off-lead with no muzzle when it should have been on a lead and muzzled as a matter of course due to it being reactive and capable of doing massive damage. You can't reason with that level of stupidity and I'd put money on that dog biting someone up in Scotland.

https://www.thenational.scot/news/24032022.xl-bullies-scotland-scottish-spca-issues-new-guidance/

Saw this earlier from the SSPCA.