British Veterinary Association

We wrote to the BVA to ask them for their opinion on dog amnesties and whether they agree with the proposed dog amnesty in Liverpool, BVA have replied below with a short statement whilst they are waiting of their Veterinary Policy Group to consider the subject, you can also link to their web site to read the BVA Policy Statement on Dangerous Dogs.

The BVA's understanding is that owners of pit bull types are to be allowed to register their dogs through the courts for a fee providing that they comply with the other requirements of the Act.  While we see some problems with the manner in which it is being done, we cannot, in principle, argue with the proposal.  We are certainly strongly against an amnesty designed to simply kill the dogs.

BVA Policy Statement:

DANGEROUS DOGS

As the BVA stated in its submission, in February 1996, to the British Government’s Home
Affairs Committee Inquiry into the operation of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991, “The BVA is
fully supportive of the Government’s aim of protecting the public from dog attacks”. It was
also stressed, however, that “the BVA has long been opposed in principle to any
proposals which single out particular breeds of dogs rather than targeting individual
aggressive dogs. The problems caused by dangerous dogs will never be solved until dog
owners appreciate that they are responsible for the actions of their animals.”

The BVA, as a member of the Federation of Veterinarians of Europe, fully supports the
FVE (http://www.fve.org/papers/pdf/aw/position_papers/00_039.pdf) position on
dangerous dogs, not least the recommendation urging the European Commission and
Member States to postpone the adoption of further breed-specific legislation until a proper
risk analysis has been carried out. As the FVE Position on Dangerous Dogs states:
“Breed-specific legislation has been shown to be difficult to apply due to the problem of
defining breeds and breed types.” This has certainly been a major source of controversy
here in the UK.
“Breed-specific legislation engenders a false and dangerous perception that breeds not
included will not show aggression. Aggression is a normal behaviour and can be shown
by any dog of any breed, type or mixed breeding.”
“Breed-specific legislation does not discriminate between individual members of a breed,
many of which may not be predisposed to aggressive behaviour. Rather, all dogs of a
specific breed, whatever their behaviour, are subject to the same restrictions.”
In June 2001 the American Veterinary Medical Association published proposed
alternatives to breed-specific legislation, in a report entitled A Model Community Approach
to Dog Bite Prevention’, developed by a task force comprised of representatives from
various veterinary bodies as well as, among others, the American Medical Association, the
American Academy of Paediatrics and the American College of Emergency Physicians.
For further information visit http://www.avma.org/press/pibreedlegislation01.asp

Finally, proscribed breeds in the UK under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991, as ‘Dogs bred
for fighting’ are the (American) pit bull terrier, the Japanese Tosa, the Dogo Argentino and
the Fila Braziliero. The Staffordshire Bull Terrier, a British breed (not to be confused with
the American Stafford, a different breed) is, as stated by the Kennel Club, a highly popular
family pet in the UK, not least because of its renowned compatibility with children.

June 2001