I accept and applaud your caring about dogs and your recognition of often accepted common behaviours of some people which are very cruel.

However, this article contains many generalisations which are inappropriate as well as statements that are simply not true.

For instance, to dismiss dog faeces as not harmful is incorrect. It can introduce harmful pollution into soil that destroys useful bacteria, can introduce disease & damage the environment.

"...little one kilogram bundles of friendliness are not dogs – dogs have to be large enough to have their own personality..." This is complete nonsense.

I am someone who prefers large dogs and have both trained and worked with security dogs, usually German Shepherds (my favourite breed), Malinois and Doberman Pinschers. I've also had the great pleasure of caring for and training many other breeds from small to large.

I agree that no dog, indeed no animal, should be used as a status symbol or ornament, however large dogs are used in that way just as much as small ones.

I also bred Yorkshire Terriers at one stage. These dogs were around 7" (17cm) in height and every one of them had a distinct and robust personality. Indeed, in over 60 years of caring for dogs I have never found a single dog that didn't, regardless of breed, age, size, whole or neutered or any other difference.

The intent of the article is, in my view, a positive one and it does raise a number of significant issues as to how dogs are regarded in different jurisdictions but it would benefit by less empty assertion, removal of many derogatory adjectives and more thoughtful construction and expression - in my view.