The Dangerous Dogs Act – we should move on to make a difference:

Following the recent tragic events involving dogs, we offer our deepest sympathies to the families involved. As parents ourselves we can only imagine the anguish caused to all those concerned.

In the aftermath of these tragic events, the public and the families are anxious for new measures to prevent dog attacks. We agree that changes must be made but it is vital that these changes are properly thought out long-term measures and not ineffective, reactive ones which will cause more needless suffering to people and dogs alike. 

We feel the call for more breeds of dog to be ‘banned’ to be a knee-jerk reaction. Instead, we would ask for and support non-breed specific legislation. A measured response is needed looking towards legislation which is aimed towards responsible ownership, the Kennel Club feels that “adding any breed to the Dangerous Dogs Act (DDA) would not help the situation and could in fact exacerbate it. Breed specific legislation is not the solution”. (1)

There were approximately 6.8 million dogs in the UK in 2004 (2) and 60.2 million people. (3)
During 2004 there were 350 convictions (4) under section 3.1 of the DDA involving ‘injury’ to a person.  The number of dog bites per year is not centrally recorded.
During a six year period from 1999 to 2004 there were on average 2.3 fatalities a year due to being bitten or struck (data was not separated from 2001)by a dog compared to 63 people who died from suffocation due to a plastic bag in 1999, 77 fatalities due to falling from a ladder in 2000 and 20 people who died as a result from being thrown from an animal in 2003.
In 2004 there were no fatalities attributed to being bitten or struck by a dog but eight people died due to hornets, wasps and bees, three people died from using powered lawnmowers and one person died from being struck by lightening. (5)
In 2005, 3,472 children were seriously injured in road traffic accidents with 141 children killed on the roads. (6) 

To some, banning breeds may seem acceptable after an event, as it did 15 years ago. However, the hastily drafted Dangerous Dogs Act of 1991 did not stop attacks by dogs and it never will, since the majority of dog-related incidents actually happen in the home. One study showed that 85% of bites occurred in the dogs’ own home, the majority involving males.(7) Another study demonstrated that in over 70% of cases, people are bitten by their own pets or by an animal known to them, with children under 5 years of age most at risk.(8) An increase in animal bites occurs in hot weather and during public holidays.

Attempting to further ban specific types of dog will not protect the public. One study showed that that there was actually little impact on the number of hospital attendances due to bite injuries following the introduction of the DDA.(9)

We need to focus on the majority of causes and get to the roots of this complex problem – irresponsible and/or uneducated people in most cases - instead of looking for a quick fix. Barbara Sykes, Member of the British Institute of Professional Dog Trainers & author of Understanding and Handling Dog Aggression, says: “Banning certain breeds of dogs is not the answer to the problem of aggression - each time a breed is banned another one will become vulnerable as the owners will move on to another breed. All dogs should be educated in good manners and all new owners should be taught how to ‘parent’ their dogs.”

We would encourage research and discussion towards alternative solutions, such as:

Further development to educate current owners of their responsibilities, as well as the basic physical and emotional needs of their dogs and bite prevention must be a priority. Renowned Animal Behaviourist Dr. Roger Mugford says: "The contemporary dog culture is only a microcosm of the attitudes and ills of the wider human society.  Just as education and skilled mentoring creates better parents, so can we create more effective and safe dog ownership in this country.  Owners of problematic dogs need to be equipped with practical skills and better knowledge of dog behaviour and not tougher sanctions before the law.  Simply put, more carrot and less stick!"      

We need better regulation regarding the breeding and selling of dogs. Selling dogs on the free-ad sites on the internet and similar newspaper publications should be better monitored and restricted as these are often full of ‘backyard breeders’ who are more concerned with profit than with the welfare, environment or temperament of the dogs, or the suitability of the homes these dogs go to. Donna Brander, Chairman of the APBC (Association of Pet Behaviour Counsellors), the leading organisation for professional pet behaviourists, states: “Our annual review of behaviour cases clearly indicates that lack of adequate socialisation is the biggest cause of aggression in dogs. The early weeks of a puppy’s life are crucial for it to develop into a well balanced adult dog.”

By ignoring the roots of the problem we cannot ever expect to truly deal with any given situation which arises – it’s time to move on and make a difference.

The negative press concerning dogs as a whole has had repercussions;
We have received reports of people being verbally abused whilst responsibly exercising their family pets. 
Since increased news coverage began, reports are already coming in to us of increasing abandonment, putting further pressure on already over-stretched rescue centres. We believe that to avoid further escalation of this problem, and to avert dog attacks in the future, all of us need to adopt a calm and mature approach and work together. This is the only way we can obtain the best results for humans and dogs alike.

If we are truly serious about better protecting people and dogs, we need to start using some common sense. Improvements will not come in the shape of breed specific legislation, it’s not that easy.
To make real progress we all deserve long term commitment and financial backing from our Government - anything less may win short term support but is doomed to fail, as history has taught us. It is time to learn the tragic lessons of the last 15 years and positively and bravely move forward.
Chris Laurence, Veterinary Director of Dogs Trust said: “Dogs Trust, the UK’s largest dog welfare charity, is calling for a revision to the Dangerous Dogs Legislation to mean that the action of a dog is the issue in question, rather than the breed of the dog.  We are calling for an approach whereby dog owners are given warnings if their dogs show aggression, regardless of breed, so that appalling attacks like those recently can more easily be prevented.”

References:
(1) “Deal with the deed not the breed.” Kennel Club (UK) Press Release 261.06  2/10/2006
(2) Annual figures by the Pet Food Manufacturers Associations in conjunction with Market Dynamics, part of the MORI Group
(3) Office for National Statistics (ONS)
(4) Convictions at Magistrates Court level in England and Wales 2004. Data from the court proceedings database held by the Office for Criminal Justice Reform.
(5) Causes of Death DH2 tables, Mortality Statistics. Office for National Statistics.
(6) Road Causalities in GB. Department of Transport Annual Report 2005
(7) “Dogs that bite.” British Medical Journal 303:1512-3
(8) Moore F; BMJ Editorial; “I’ve just been bitten by a dog.” BMJ 1997; 314:88 (11 January)
(9) “Does the Dangerous Dogs Act protect against animal attacks: a prospective study of mammalian bites in the Accident and Emergency department.”  B Klaasen, J.R Buckley, A. Esmail. Aberdeen Royal Infirmary