Animal Welfare (Responsibility for Dog Attacks) Bill presented:

 This is a Private Members' Bill (under the Ten Minute Rule) which is sponsored by Anna Firth Conversative MP.

A Bill to amend the Animal Welfare Act 2006 to require a person in charge of a dog to take all reasonable steps to ensure that that dog does not fatally injure another dog; and for connected purposes.

https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3466 To Be Printed-Bill 132.

This Bill had its 1sr reading in the Commons in May 2023 and the 2nd reading is currently scheduled to take place on 24^th November 2023.

Further details from the 1^st reading:

That leave be given to bring in a Bill to amend the Animal Welfare Act 2006 to require a person in charge of a dog to take all reasonable steps to ensure that that dog does not fatally injure another dog; and for connected purposes.

Britain is undoubtedly a nation of dog lovers, with recent estimates suggesting that there are 13 million dogs in the UK. In other words, almost half of all households probably have a dog. For many, a dog is not just a pet but a much-loved member of the family. Certainly, my predecessor, Sir David, loved his two pugs, Lily and Bo. My own cavapoochon, Lottie, is a much-loved member of our family.

Research shows that companionship is the most common reason for having a dog. That was absolutely the case for my constituent Michael, who is with us in the Public Gallery. Michael lost his long-standing girlfriend unexpectedly and suddenly to epilepsy, so, after her death, he adopted her beautiful, white, fluffy, bichon frisé bitch Emilie—known affectionately as Millie—both to keep him company and to help him grieve.

Emilie was a wonderful dog. She was gentle, sweet and obedient, and she totally captured Michael’s heart. However, 18 months ago, Emilie was savagely attacked by an off-lead, out-of-control dog while on a walk through the rose garden in Chalkwell Park, Leigh-on-Sea. Michael described the attack as like watching a horror movie. The dog came at Emilie like a missile and, although she was on her lead, “shook her like a rag-doll”.

Michael found himself helpless to stop Emilie being torn apart in front of his eyes. After the attack, he had no option but to carry Emilie, bleeding and with serious open wounds to her abdomen, to the nearest vet, where sadly she was put down. Outrageously, the owner of the dog that attacked Emilie refused to take any responsibility —not even paying the vet’s bill for euthanasia.

No dog owner or dog should have to go through what Michael and Emilie experienced. I believe that we would all be devastated if that happened to our own pet dog, but we would be doubly devastated if, on reporting the matter to the police, we were told that there is nothing they could do as it was simply dog on dog. Yet that is exactly what happened to Michael. That is why I am introducing the Bill.

Sadly, Michael’s experience is far from unique. Since launching the Bill, I have been inundated with heartbreaking tales from dog owners all around the country. Blue the collie, Beau the Yorkshire terrier, Luath the dachshund and Ozzy the cocker spaniel are just some of the names of beautiful dogs that have been viciously killed by other dogs through no fault of their own or their owners.

The statistics back up the anecdotal evidence. After the incident, I submitted freedom of information requests to all 43 police forces in the UK asking if they record dog-on-dog attacks as a separate offence and, if so, how many they had recorded over the last 5 years. Shockingly, only 14 police forces currently record a dog-on-dog attack as a separate incident. However, in 2016 those 14 reported and recorded 1,700 dog-on-dog attacks. Since lockdown, with everyone buying their covid-19 pandemic puppies, the numbers have skyrocketed. In 2021, the same 14 police forces recorded 11,559 dog-on-dog attacks—a 700% increase—with a shocking 2,264 in London alone.

The true incidence of dog-on-dog attacks across the country is likely to be far greater, since it would be ridiculous to assume that those attacks occur only in areas where police forces happen to record them. Scaled up, therefore, there could be as many as 35,000 dog-on-dog attacks each year across the UK—and increasing. Pet insurance companies have also reported dog-on-dog attacks to be rising, resulting in vets bills running to many thousands of pounds for affected households.

Laws, both civil and criminal, have been strengthened in recent years to protect the public where a dog presents as a risk to public safety, whether in public or in private, but it remains the case that a dog owner is not liable to any form of criminal prosecution when their dog fatally attacks or seriously injures another dog, unless: the other dog is a guide, assistance or service dog; the dog bites a human; or “there are grounds for reasonable apprehension that it will injure any person”.

That is, quite simply, not right. Self-evidently, that is frequently not the case with a dog-on-dog attack, where so often a larger dog is making a bee-line for a smaller dog. In Michael’s case, he did not fear any injury to himself, because it was so clear that the dog was going for Emilie. Ironically, if Emilie had been stolen, not attacked, Michael’s legal remedies would have been far greater. For starters, under the Theft Act 1968, the perpetrator could have received up to seven years imprisonment. But because Emilie was brutally torn apart by someone else’s dog, nothing could be done. Not surprisingly, this leaves pet owners feeling powerless and deeply frustrated. It is also no doubt the reason why police forces do not even record such awful incidents.

Plainly, it is not the dogs that are the problem. Dogs have owners and every dog owner has a responsibility to ensure their dog does not fatally attack another one. In addition, there is a growing cohort of evidence that tackling dog-on-dog aggression and dog attacks in particular may well prevent a dog from going on and attacking other animals, adults or even children. As Benjamin Franklin so famously said:

“An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure”,

The Bill seeks to address all those issues. First, amending the Animal Welfare Act to criminalise fatal dog-on-dog attacks would extend the same protection to pet dogs that already exist for service, guide and assistance dogs. Pet dogs are as important to humans as service dogs. Indeed, when it comes to mental health, all dogs are service dogs.

Secondly, Emilie’s law would empower owners to pursue justice if their beloved pet is brutally attacked, while not demonising any particular breed or creating unhelpful stereotypes around certain breeds of dogs.

Thirdly, the Bill would encourage responsible dog ownership and animal welfare. Placing the responsibility for a fatal dog attack fairly and squarely on the person in charge of the dog, and empowering the police to take action, will have a deterrent effect, thus encouraging more responsible dog ownership.

Finally, the Bill would compel local police forces to record dog-on-dog attacks as separate offences, so that, finally, the full scale of these awful offences can be seen and counted. Passing this law would be a significant step in the right direction, but its effectiveness will depend heavily upon enforcement, so we must continue to work closely with the police and law enforcement agencies to ensure offenders are brought to justice.

I am well aware that most private Member’s Bills never make the statute book, but I am hopeful that this one will. It would certainly be extremely popular if it did. Emilie’s law has already garnered a huge amount of public support. However, if the Bill does not make the statute book, I would urge the Government to initiate an immediate review of existing laws regarding dog attacks, with a view to amending the current law to protect pet dogs in a similar way to service, guide and assistance dogs.

The Bill is about protecting the 13 million dogs across the country. Most dog owners are responsible, but there must be consequences for the small minority who are not. This is about dealing with that small minority who irresponsibly allow their dogs to kill other people’s dogs. By passing the Bill, not only will we help to make all dogs more secure, we will also make our parks, our streets, our towns and our cities, especially the new city of Southend, safer places for us all to live, work and visit.

Question put and agreed to.

Ordered, That Anna Firth, Wayne David, Elliot Colburn, Henry Smith, Mr Mark Francois, Sir Oliver Heald, Jane Stevenson, Selaine Saxby, Gareth Johnson, Margaret Ferrier, Damian Green and Peter Gibson present the Bill.

Welfare of Seized Dogs

 

Appoint an Independent Team to oversee the welfare of dogs seized by Police - Please sign and share the Petition

Debbie Connolly is an experienced behaviourist & expert witness assessor for Dangerous Dogs Act cases and started this petition:

Dogs seized by Police are held in kennels whilst cases are investigated. Owners cannot be told where these kennels are located.  I am an expert witness, I assess dogs involved in bite incidents.  Some forces allow us to see the dog at the holding kennels, many forces do not or have changed their policies to prevent us visiting dogs in kennels.

I have personally made complaints to Police and RSPCA regarding unsuitable conditions, there are many incidents in the papers where dogs have died during seizure or gone home in a very poor state.  These have not made much difference.

I wrote a charter to improve the seized dog process, starting with leaving contact details with the owner and particularly allowing experts to assess all dogs at the kennels. The big names in the dog industry, Dogs Trust, Blue Cross, Battersea, Kennel Club etc do not wish to support this and wish to carry on with their work.  Whilst they do this, after years of them achieving no change, dogs are suffering. I intend to bring this change now.

Only the allowing of experts into kennels and the appointing of an independent inspection team can change the welfare state of seized dogs. 

Please sign and share https://www.change.org/welfareofseizeddogs

Petition to replace DDA/BSL with new legislation:

 Signatures Needed for the current and latest Government e-Petition which is open for signatures until April 2023. 

At 10,000 signatures the Government will give a written response and at 100,000 signatures, if reached, the Government will consider a debate in Parliament, raising awareness and keeping the pressure on for smarter dog law.

Sign Here - https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/624876

The Petition reads as below:

Repeal the current Dangerous Dogs Act and replace with new framework

We want the Government to repeal the Dangerous Dogs Act and replace it with legislation that focuses on early intervention to prevent dog bites and tackle dog-related issues regardless of breed or type, based solely on their behaviour

The Government commissioned a steering group to provide advice on policies aimed at reducing dog attacks and promoting responsible ownership of dogs. However, their report is not due until next year.

In view of shocking and tragic events that continue to result from the current legislation, urgent action is required NOW, in the interest of public safety and the welfare of dogs. Organisations involved in the Government's steering group oppose Breed Specific Legislation and agree breed is not a prediction of aggressive behaviour. We believe the current legislation is enabling more fatalities and failing to prevent the dog attack trend. It needs repeal immediately.

Government Petition reaches 100k - End BSL

As the UK Gov petition has reached 100,000 signatures, it will now go forward to be considered for a debate in parliament - so please write to your own MP and bring this petition and the issue to their attention, ask them if they will be attending any debate if this is to hopefully follow.

It is time to change outdated flawed breed specific legislation which does nothing to reduce dog incidents it also does not promote public safety or responsible dog ownership. We need smarter fairer dog brewed neutral legislation and educational initiatives which actually work.

www.writetothem.com

www.theyworkforyou.com

The written response to the petition from Defra is as follows:

Simply repealing the breed specific provisions in dangerous dogs legislation with no other changes would increase the risks to public safety, which the Government is unwilling to do.

I recognise that many people are opposed to the prohibitions placed on the four types of dog - Pit Bull terrier; Dogo Argentino; Fila Brasileiro and the Japanese Tosa. However, the Government must balance the views of those who want to repeal or amend the breed specific legislation with our responsibility to ensure that the public is properly protected from dog attacks.

Historically, pit bull types are powerful dogs which have been traditionally bred in the UK for dog fighting. Data gathered from 2005 onwards on fatal dog attacks show that pit bulls were involved in around one in six tragic incidents, despite the prohibitions that we have in place that have significantly limited the numbers of pit bulls in the UK. Furthermore, according to information from the Metropolitan Police, nearly 20 per cent of dogs found to be dangerously out of control in Greater London were pit bulls.

The Government, therefore, considers that a lifting of the restrictions on these types of dogs would more likely result in an increase in dog attacks, rather than contributing to any reduction in such incidents. This position is supported by the police.

Despite the general prohibitions on these types of dog, individual prohibited dogs can be kept by their owners or person for the time being in charge if a court judges that the dog is not a danger to public safety, subject to certain conditions, including being on a lead and muzzled in public.

In December 2021, Defra published research in collaboration with Middlesex University to look at responsible ownership across all breeds of dog. The research considers different approaches and the effectiveness of current dog control measures and makes several recommendations including specifically on improving the evidence base. The report will provide the basis for the consideration of reform in this area and the Government is already working with the police, local authorities, and stakeholders to consider the recommendations further.

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. 

(End)

DDA-BSL UK - further calls for total overhaul - the Vet Times:

 The Dangerous Dogs Act (DDA) has been slammed in a damning new report as animal welfare charities and the BVA renew calls for an urgent review of the controversial legislation.

With the 30th anniversary of the act looming in August, the RSPCA has released a report titled “Breed specific legislation – a dog’s dinner” that blames laws surrounding supposedly dangerous breeds for harming dogs and dog owners.

Ineffective

The law was introduced in 1991 as a reaction to a period of highly publicised dog attacks which culminated in a law that the report admonishes as backed by “a surprising lack of scientific evidence”.

The report finds that while the DDA introduced a raft of measures intended to decrease the amount of dog bite incidents across the UK, it has in no way impacted the rate of such attacks.

Increased cases

Between March 2005 and February 2015, the number of hospital admissions in England due to dog bites increased 76% – from 4,110 to 7,227.

Samantha Grimes, an RSPCA dog welfare expert and lead author of the report, described the DDA as “letting down” dogs that look a certain way before going on to describe the DDA as “unfair, unjust and wrong”.

Fatalities

Dr Grimes added: “The Dangerous Dogs Act was a knee-jerk piece of legislation, introduced in response to a series of high-profile dog attacks.

“But in the 30 years since its inception, hospital admissions due to dog bites have continued to rise, tragic fatalities as a result of dog incidents have continued, and thousands of dogs have needlessly lost their lives.

“It’s high time the UK Government responds to the scientific research, follows in the footsteps of other nations around the world that have repealed breed-specific legislation and do not just what is right for dogs, but for public safety, and ensure both are better protected.”

Section one

The BVA has long called for a total overhaul of the law as part of its “Deed not Breed” campaign that urges the Government to consider new legislation that examines severity of incidents rather than the breed involved.

The association would rather see section one of the act – pertaining to specific banned breeds – removed entirely and an Australian-style database of known dog bites to be set up.

‘Total overhaul’

BVA senior vice-president Daniella Dos Santos said: “We have long campaigned for a total overhaul of the 1991 DDA because it targets specific breeds rather than deeds and gives a false impression that dogs not on the banned list are ‘safe’.

“Evidence gathered as part of our recent policy update further supports our view that breed-specific legislation has been ineffective in its intended aims, thereby failing to properly protect the public or safeguard dog welfare over the past three decades.”

Dr Dos Santos added: “We’ll be writing to the Home Office and Defra, and will be joining up with other campaign organisations in the lead-up to the act’s 30th anniversary in August to push for effective, evidence-based solutions.”

• For the full story, see the 6 July issue of Vet Times.

Royal Mail and CWU Dog Awareness Week

Dog Awareness Week July 2017:

• 
  

Royal Mail and the Communication Workers Union are launching their annual dog awareness week 3 – 7 July.
As the UK school break for their summer holidays, families enjoy the summer weather, which is good news for them but BAD NEWS FOR POSTAL WORKERS as this signals what Posties know as the ‘dog-bite season’ and the time of the year which traditionally sees a big spike in the number of attacks.

Royal Mail and postal workers trade union the CWU will be campaigning again to raise public awareness and urge customers to be responsible dog owners as well as urge caution amongst postmen and women who want to provide a good service but sometimes pay a heavy price.

CWU National Health and Safety Officer Dave Joyce said: "Seven postal workers are attacked by dogs every day of the year. It is unacceptable and the whole idea of Dog Awareness Week is to highlight the problem and the repercussions for dog owners and the victims, many of whom are seriously injured and some can not return to mail delivery work”.

“Over 70% of Dog Attacks on Postmen and Women occur on the garden path or at the doorstep of the dog owners home. It just needs owners to restrict their animals access to the front garden or to put their dog in another room before opening the door to collect a parcel or sign for an item.”

“Customers are always pleased to see the Postman or Postwoman arrive as they’re eager to take delivery of their goods they’ve ordered and paid for on the internet but thousands of customers who own a dog unfortunately don’t give a second thought to the Postal Worker’s safety by putting the dog in a safe, secure place.”  

“The vast majority of our customers and their dogs aren't a problem but irresponsible and reckless dog owners are.”

“The new dog control laws now identify and penalises irresponsible dog owners and many are now facing prosecution and paying heavy court penalties and end up withcriminal records. So it’s in their best interest in more ways than one to make sure the dog don’t bite the Postman.”

“One Essex dog owner was recently fined £8,800 after his dog injured a Postwoman’s fingers as she put letters through the door – which is another problem Postal workers face!”

“The penalties can also include losing their dogs, being banned from dog ownership, paying compensation and even a Jail sentence.”

“Dog owners need to fully understand that their actions usually are the cause of a dog being dangerous and simple precautions can prevent the pain for everyone concerned. No matter what breed of dog is involved, the dog can present a substantial danger to postal workers."

Top tips for dog owners to help the postman or woman deliver the post in safety:
• Keep your dog indoors around the time that the postman calls to deliver mail.
• Before you opened the door to collect a parcel or sign for an item - put your dog in another room.
• Make sure children don’t open the door, as dogs can push by them and attack the postman.
• If you have a back garden, close off the access, so your dog can't get round to the front when the postman calls.
• If your dog attacks the mail and could bite a postman’s fingers as he puts mail through your letterbox, please fit a letter box cage.
• If it’s not practical for you to keep your dog away from a postman delivering your mail, consider fitting a secure mailbox on the edge of your property.

Dog Bite Incidents Database Proposed:

We have received this news released from the KC, following a meeting which took place in London earlier this week:

A meeting of dangerous dogs experts, led by the UK's largest dog welfare organisation, the Kennel Club, has laid the groundwork for an agreed strategy for reducing dog bite incidents in the UK.

The meeting enabled experts from across the veterinary and medical professions, the police, local authorities, government representatives, academics, sociologists and animal welfare charities, to share existing knowledge and information on dog bite incidents in order to develop a plan to garner government support and funding for a new nationwide strategy for dangerous, or out of control dogs.

A proposal will now be developed which will incorporate the need for a robust central database for the investigation of dog bite incidents, which can be fed into by relevant parties including vets, medics, the police and dog wardens.  This will provide crucial data on the causes of dog bites and will enable more preventative measures to be implemented, such as required training for any dog which shows early signs of aggression.

Also included in the proposed strategy will be the need to treat dog aggression as a public health issue and the importance of educating dog owners, the general public, children and educators on responsible dog ownership and how to safely interact with dogs.

Caroline Kisko, Kennel Club Secretary, said:  "Dog bites are clearly a public health issue, and to ensure that both public safety and dog welfare remain paramount we need to make changes to this country's strategy on dogs which are allowed to be out of control. It is absolutely crucial that we get it right to avoid a further increase in dog bite incidents.

"We believe the key to this is through gathering data on incidents as they happen through immediate and thorough investigation, so that genuinely preventative measures can be put in place and the law can be overhauled to reflect this.

"There are so many factors that need to be looked at when a dog bites someone, including social, medical, cultural, psychological and behavioural elements, and by gathering such data we can get far better insight into the reasons for bites.

"A key part of a preventative strategy is education on how to interact safely with dogs.  The majority of recorded incidents involve children in some way, so educating them from an early age is crucial.  There are initiatives and information resources that exist already, such as the Kennel Club's Safe and Sound programme and Good Citizen Dog Training Scheme, as well as the Pet Education Resources group, but we would like to see a more unified education programme to reduce dog bite incidents.

"We were overwhelmed by the turnout and the level of interest in the roundtable discussion and are glad that all relevant stakeholders are keen to move forward together on this important issue.  The meeting was very much the first step in pushing for a new strategy on dangerous dogs and we are particularly appreciative for the support of our speakers at the meeting, Kendal Shepherd, Danielle Greenberg and Chris Mannion, who delivered effective arguments for why we need urgent change."

The Kennel Club believes that dangerous dog law should be updated and consolidated and replaced with preventative measures based on evidence gathered through data collected on a national level from hospitals and GPs, veterinary surgeries, police dog units, and dog wardens, amongst other sources, instead of laws based on the stereotyping of certain breeds. 

Biographies for four key speakers at the dangerous dog meeting held by the Kennel Club:

Kendal Shepherd BVSc CCAB MRCVS
Kendal qualified from Bristol University in 1978.  With extensive experience in small animal practice, she was the first veterinary surgeon to be accredited by ASAB as a certificated clinical animal behaviourist in 2005.  She is currently heavily involved in the behavioural assessment of dogs for the Courts under both sections 1 and 3 of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991.

Danielle Greenberg BA Hons (Oxon.) MA BVSc MRCVS

Danielle studied Modern History at Oxford University before following her dream to become a vet. She qualified in 1998, and works in a busy small animal hospital in Liverpool.

Christopher J. Mannion FRCS(Eng.) FDSRCS(Eng.) PGC MedEd FHEA

Christopher qualified in Dentistry and then in Medicine from Guys, Kings and St Thomas' Medical school. Christopher works as a Consultant Maxillofacial Surgeon at Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust. He has a subspecialty interest in trauma and facial reconstruction. He is an Honorary Senior Lecturer at the University of Leeds, School of Medicine, and is the Training Programme Director for training in Maxillofacial Surgery.

Bill Lambert

Bill is the Kennel Club Health & Breeder Services Manager. Bill has been involved with dogs all his life and bred his first litter in 1982. He is a Championship show judge of Bull Terriers and Miniature Bull Terriers and has officiated in a number of countries around the world. He is a former Vice Chairman of the Bull Terrier Club, and was a Committee Member from 1984 to 2007. Bill's interest in dangerous dogs began as early as the late 1970s when the American Pit Bull Terrier was first imported into the UK in large numbers and since that time he has visited breeders across the globe to gain a fuller understanding.