Bruce Appeal - Responses:

Michelle Gildernew MP MLA

I refer to your recent correspondence about Bruce, who is being kept in kennels having been seized under the Dogs NI Order 1983. Under the Order it is an offence for a person to be in possession of certain types of dog, such as the pit bull terrier.
 
The dog was due to be destroyed on the 6th July 2009, under a Destruction Order imposed by a Court here. However, I understand that Bruce's owner's legal team, has launched an appeal against the decision of the Court. The Local Council is awaiting the outcome of the appeal.
 
I am currently reviewing the Dogs and Dangerous Dogs legislation and I hope to bring forward legislative proposals to the Executive after the Summer Recess.
 
Michelle Gildernew MP MLA
Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development

RT HON JEFFREY DONALDSON MP MLA:

Thank you for your recent correspondence by email regarding your concerns about the plight of Bruce who I understand is a Staffordshire Bull Terrier and is presently being held by an unidentified local authority in Northern Ireland.

In view of your representations and those from other interested individuals, I intend to make enquiries about this particular matter and will see what I can do to ensure that the concerns raised by the family who own Bruce are fully addressed, including his welfare.

Thank you for taking the time to be in touch with me about this particular matter. It is very much appreciated.

With kind regards,

Yours sincerely

The Office of Shaun Woodward MP:

Thank you for your enquiry or comment placed on the ShaunWoodward.com website today (6 July 2009).

This is to confirm that it has been received and will receive urgent consideration.

Many thanks

Cllr Peter Weir MLA:

Re Bruce the Dog

Thank you for your e mail. I was concerned to read about the situation that Bruce has found himself in, and have written to North Down Borough Council to see if anything can be done.

Given however that a judicial process has been put in place it may be difficult to see what action can be taken to rectify the situation. I regret that this is the case but it would be wrong to give you false hope.

The Assembly has risen for the summer, but I will press the Minister to introduce the appropriate legislation to ensure that no other Bruces are put in the same position.

Yours faithfully

Vet Northern Ireland (VetNI):

Thank you for drawing this to our attention. 

I would like to point out that VetNI is the secretariat for the profession and does not employ any veterinary surgeons, however Bruce’s case has been brought to the attention of the veterinary associations in Northern Ireland.  

VetNI does not offer comment on specific cases particularly if they are still under consideration by the courts, and cannot speak on behalf of every individual vet in the province, however most practitioners in Northern Ireland would be supportive of the BVA policy (http://www.bva.co.uk/public/documents/ps_dangerous_dogs.pdf) which endorses the Government’s aim of protecting the public from dog attacks whilst opposing any proposals which single out particular breeds of dogs rather than targeting individual aggressive dogs.

The Dogs Trust

Dogs Trust, the UK’s largest dog welfare charity, is deeply saddened to hear about the plight of Bruce and our hearts go out to his family. While we are unable to comment on individual cases like Bruce’s, it underlines the inherent flaws in the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991.

The type known as a pit bull terrier is not a recognised breed in the UK and it is therefore difficult to positively identify a dog as a prohibited type. Consequently there are many crossbreeds that are very stockily built and have long legs and might therefore mistakenly be classified as a pit bull type. Many of these are beloved family pets with no tendency to aggression and therefore no danger to the public.

Dogs Trust considers that, where the dog is a family pet and shows no tendency to aggression, the dog should automatically be entered on the Index created under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991. They should also be required to comply with the other requirements under the Act (neutering, microchipping, insurance, muzzling).

Dogs Trust continues to lobby Government for replacement of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 with new law to reflect the ‘deed not breed’ of a dog; to adequately deal with aggressive or dangerous dogs based on the actions of a dog rather than its breed.

The Kennel Club:

Many thanks for your email.

The DDA (1991) was amended by the Dangerous Dogs (Amendment) Act 1997. The 1997 Act removed the mandatory destruction order provisions of the 1991 Act by giving the courts discretion on sentencing, and re-opened the Index of Exempted Dogs for those prohibited dogs which the courts consider would not pose a risk to the public. The Amendment applies to owners in England, Wales and Scotland and in many cases has literally proved to be a lifeline to many dogs and their owners.

Unfortunately this Amendment is not extended to Northern Ireland. We do not understand why a pit bull type dog (based purely on its looks) in one part of the UK is regarded as more of a danger than the same dog would pose in another part.

Ultimately the Kennel Club wants new legislation but as the government in Westminster seems unwilling to review the current DDA, we will push for the 1997 Amendment to apply in Northern Ireland- we encourage all dog owners in Northern Ireland to do the same.

The RSPCA:

It is wrong that an entire breed of dog should be banned purely on the basis of its genetic make-up, without any consideration of an individual dog’s characteristics and temperament.

The Dangerous Dogs (Amendment) Act 1997 was introduced in England and Wales so that the automatic death sentence on all pit bull type dogs was lifted.

If Northern Ireland had adopted this amendment, many family pets identified as being pit bull types would be allowed to live out their life with their owners in accordance with the law. They would not be forced to spend their final days in kennels before being inevitably destroyed.

The RSPCA continues to campaign for the government to reassess its current dog legislation and shift emphasis from the four legs at the end of a lead to the two legs at the other. We want irresponsible owners to be held accountable for their actions, not their dogs.

National Canine Research Council:

Bruce:   A Good Dog -     Sentenced to Die Because of his “Looks”

NCRC Comment: It is totally unacceptable and a monument to human foolishness that, Bruce,  a dog no one has ever had a complaint against, and whose owners have moved heaven and earth not just to save his life, but to have him back in theirs, and whom even the judge said posed no danger, stands at the edge of eternity.  And for what?  His appearance? 

The evidence is incontrovertible that breed specific legislation protects no one against anything.  It is a miserable failure, nothing more than a rationale for fear-driven animal cruelty.

Liberate Bruce now.   And let his liberation stand as a monument to common sense and compassion.

Webmistress I Terms and Conditions I Contact

Copyright © 2009 Endangered Dogs Defence and Rescue Ltd