Permission to cross post was given to me, I am appallled but do not know where
to go with this, altjhough I have e mailed a complaint to ITV

At 9pm tonight ITV will screen a new program hosted by Chris Tarrant called The
Door

Yesterday a clip from this program was featured on This Morning:

http://www.itv.com/lifestyle/thismorning/showbiz/christarrant/

(clip cannot be viewed only heard, however in this clip you can see the dogs)

http://www.itv.com/entertainment/thedoor/

German Shepherds are caged supposedly hungry and described by Tarrant as rancid
and savage. Celebrities then crawl in between the cages with pieces of raw meat
attached to themselves.
This cause great distress to the dogs and makes them appear aggressive - all in
the name of entertainment.
With so much in the press at the moment about dangerous dogs, this is totally
inappropriate material for TV

The program makers have committed a section 4 offence under the Animal Welfare
act and should be prosecuted:

ANIMAL WELFARE ACT 2006
4 Unnecessary suffering
(1) A person commits an offence if--
(a) an act of his, or a failure of his to act, causes an animal to suffer,
(b) he knew, or ought reasonably to have known, that the act, or failure toact,
would have that effect or be likely to do so,
(c) the animal is a protected animal, and
(d) the suffering is unnecessary.
(2) A person commits an offence if--
(a) he is responsible for an animal,
(b) an act, or failure to act, of another person causes the animal to suffer,
(c) he permitted that to happen or failed to take such steps (whether byway of
supervising the other person or otherwise) as were reasonablein all the
circumstances to prevent that happening, and
(d) the suffering is unnecessary.
(3) The considerations to which it is relevant to have regard when determining
forthe purposes of this section whether suffering is unnecessary include--
(a) whether the suffering could reasonably have been avoided or reduced;
(b) whether the conduct which caused the suffering was in compliancewith any
relevant enactment or any relevant provisions of a licence orcode of practice
issued under an enactment;
(c) whether the conduct which caused the suffering was for a legitimatepurpose,
such as--
(i) the purpose of benefiting the animal, or
(ii) the purpose of protecting a person, property or another animal;
(d) whether the suffering was proportionate to the purpose of the
conductconcerned;
(e) whether the conduct concerned was in all the circumstances that of
areasonably competent and humane person.

I'll say what I already said elsewhere.
Ofcom is the place to complain to about a TV programme -the more people the better. When they had Malinois killing people in "Lewis" a lot of us made complaints to Ofcom. They dismissed it but did at least look into it and eventually replied by letter.

>
> German Shepherds are caged supposedly hungry and described by Tarrant as rancid and savage. Celebrities then crawl in between the cages with pieces of raw meat attached to themselves.
> This cause great distress to the dogs and makes them appear aggressive - all in the name of entertainment.
> With so much in the press at the moment about dangerous dogs, this is totally inappropriate material for TV
>   

I agree it's inappropriate to say the least and not entertainment, however I'd reserve judgement until the programme has been SEEN. There wasn't enough in the clips to be able to judge. How do you know the dogs simply aren't trained to bark on command? Look the part? Why would we believe the dogs were hungry just because they say so? Why would it necessarily cause them distress to have people crawl around the pens with meat attached to them (that weren't all that close from what I could see) if they were well trained, socialised and secure dogs? Surely most dogs would find it a bit odd perhaps, but not distressing. My show dogs go to shows without being fed first, see other handlers in the ring baiting their dogs, that doesn't distress them. Nor would my secure dogs worry about the situation described -but the couple of insecure ones I have would. I don't think we can just assume anything here yet.

When complaining you should point out that people may try this for real at home and it will encourage dogs to see humans as an easy target to attack. They'll soon stop it then!

I read in the paper the programme makers have said that the programme is ok because the dogs weren't really under any form of duress and weren't really starved.

However who is to say that in real life a dog might be starved or ill treated to recreate the same situation?

omg I wish the tv companies would think things through before they do things. Particularly where dogs are concerned its such a hot potato given our current climate with dogs