Telegraph & Guardian Articles

[Ian]

Favourable article in the Telegraph by Peter Wedderburn, 5 December 2009,

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/peterwedderburn/100018666/barking-up-the-wrong-tree-about-dangerous-dogs/

 

"Barking up the wrong tree about dangerous dogs "

 

By Peter Wedderburn UK Last updated: December 3rd, 2009

 

13 Comments Comment on this article

 

In the wake of the death of another young child in the jaws of “pit bull type†dog, there’s been the usual knee jerk reaction. News websites have called it “the latest in a line of vicious and sometimes fatal dog attacks on children“. Liz Hunt, a Telegraph columnist, has called for “immediate action at a local and national level to better control the presence of these wild animals in the communityâ€. It’s so easy to focus on snarling images of pitbull-type dogs, fall in with the crowd baying for dog blood, and forget the facts.

 

So, what are they?

 

Firstly, “the line of vicious and … fatal attacks†numbers four in the past three years. They’re horrific, they make news headlines, but compared to many other causes of child mortality, the numbers are small. As I said in a previous blog, the risk of injuries caused by dogs needs to be seen in perspective. As many as 18,000 children may have been injured while playing on trampolines last summer, yet the level of debate about “trampoline control†is non-existent compared to the emotional furore that follows incidents involving dogs.

 

Secondly, “these wild animals†are not causing problems “in the communityâ€. Every case of a young child or baby being killed by a dog has happened at home, to children known to the dog concerned. The same applies to nearly all dog bites: nearly all occur at home, to humans who are familiar to the dog.

 

One of the big problems is that we don’t know precisely what happens in these attacks. The dogs are inevitably destroyed immediately, which is understandable, given the shocking nature of the events, but this action removes the possibility of finding out more about what went wrong. In a fatal car crash, the car itself is forensically examined to investigate all contributory factors, human or otherwise. Why should the same not happen when there’s a fatal dog bite?

 

The solution lies not in “tit-for-tat†punishment after the event, nor in “preventative†prejudice against dogs of certain conformation, but in gaining a better understanding of the nature of dogs and the people that own them. We certainly do need to find out why certain dogs kill rather than just bite when worried and excited, and what the factors are that trigger this sequence. But if we just keep targeting the visual type of dog, rather than analysing the genetics, experience and circumstance, we will be no further forward.

 

 

 

 

Unfortunately complete with snarling dog picture, but there are also comments by Dogs Trust, Merseyside Police & DDAWatch in The Guardian, Helen Carter, Sunday 6 December 2009

http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2009/dec/06/dangerous-dogs-act-calls-repeal

 

Dangerous dogs law is a mess, warn campaigners

Dog attacks and number of people taken to hospital have doubled since 1991 act, activists say

 

 

The death of four-year-old John-Paul Massey, who was mauled by his uncle's illegal pit bull terrier in Liverpool has led to calls for a repeal of the Dangerous Dogs Act.

 

The act, introduced in 1991, is failing to prevent dog attacks, campaigners say. Former dog trainer Ryan O'Meara, publisher of K9 magazine, calls the act a shambles: "We need to have a new law that compels every single person who owns a dog to have compulsory education — that is the only way we are going to reverse these problems."

 

O'Mears adds that labelling all pit bulls as dangerous is as ridiculous as saying Ford Mondeos are the most dangerous car on the road.

 

Clarissa Baldwin, the Dogs Trust chief executive, said: "By banning certain breeds of dog rather than focusing on tackling anti-social behaviour it has not prevented a large number of dog attacks or reduced the number of pit bull terrier-type dogs in the UK. Since that act was introduced. the number of hospitalisations is reported as having doubled."

 

Alison Green, the head of DDA Watch, says the act is not working "as has been proven in the most horrible way in Liverpool".

 

"There have been deaths and an amnesty, but it has not been effective," she says. "It has not made one jot of difference to dangerous dogs.

 

"After cases like this people feel pressure to re-home their dogs by family members because of the media coverage.

 

"If people have bull breed-type dogs they find it difficult to walk them and they will often not be allowed at training classes when they are legally held, exercised and treated by vets."

 

Chief Superintendent John Martin, of Merseyside police, says pit bull describes a variety of dogs and is a complex issue. "If there is a dangerous out-of-control dog, we can instigate section 3 of the act and seize the dog.

 

"We have to respond in a way that is lawful, reasonable and proportionate to the circumstances and we try to reduce the risk and harm to the public."

 

John-Paul Massey's uncle, 21-year-old Christian Foulkes, was arrested on suspicion of manslaughter.

 

The Dogs Trust wants the act to be repealed, to deal with aggressive or dangerous dogs based on actions rather than breed.

 

Certain breeds such as Staffordshire bull terriers, bull mastiffs and rottweilers are being vilified and labelled "dangerous dogs" because of their popularity with certain members of society and gang members.

 

When the dog fails to behave in the desired way it can be abused or abandoned. The trust's re-homing centres are seeing more unwanted bull breeds than any other dog.

 

Another dog, a brown pit bull, walks past with its owner, but won't talk.

 

The pit bull was made illegal under the Dangerous Dogs Act, along with Japanese tosas, fila brasilero and dogo argentino. The only way they can be allowed is if the owner obtains a certificate of exemption from a court after having the dog neutered, insured and a transponder implanted and an identification tattoo.