Is this the beginning of the end for the disastrous Dangerous Dogs Act?

Is this the beginning of the end for the disastrous Dangerous Dogs Act?
    Is this the beginning of the end for the disastrous Dangerous Dogs Act

    Is this the beginning of the end for the disastrous Dangerous Dogs Act?
    On 11 May, the Environment,
    Food and Rural Affairs (Efra) committee launched an inquiry into the legislation on dangerous dogs.
    The Dangerous Dogs Act was introduced in 1991 and last amended in 2014. Section 1, also known as
    breed-specific legislation, makes it an offense to keep four types of dog,
    which the government states are traditionally bred for fighting – the Pit Bull Terrier, Japanese Tosa, Fila
    Brasileiro and Dogo Argentino.
    Most importantly, it bans any dogs that look to be of a ‘type’ that shows a significant number of characteristics
    of one of the above breeds.
    And therein lies the problem. The concept of ‘significant’, statistically, means ‘mostly’ or ‘majority’ – a
    concept that is easily understood mathematically. But what makes a dog ‘mostly’ a Dogo Argentino or
    Fila Brasileiro type? Well, one could say, “It’s simple! Do a DNA test. If that dog has ‘mostly’ Japanese Tosa, it is a
    banned breed.”

    Sadly, that is not how it works. Judgment on whether a dog is a ‘dangerous type’ relies solely on measurements and shape. And this is one of the key reasons why this act is often used as an example of failed legislation: not only was it passed in a rush and its various amendments have made it impractical to clearly execute,
    it also fails to deliver what it set out to do: protect the public from bites.
    Research from lobbying and campaign group Born Innocent reveals the average number of deaths due to dog bites in the UK is 2.8 people per year. This is in contrast to the average number of bites for the 10 years before the introduction of the Dangerous Dogs Act, which was 1.1 per year.
    That is a rise of 155 percent. The number of dogs is believed to have increased by 16 percent since the act
    came into force and the population rise is similar at 15%.
    The team analyzed data from the Office of National Statistics and found that you are more likely to die due to interaction with other mammals, such as cows and pigs, or due to a bee or wasp sting. Of course, no one wants to take away from the terrible loss that any death brings, but deaths by dog bites are rare.
    Sadly, bites are not. According to data published in 2015 by the NHS,
    “Hospital admissions for injuries caused by dogs have risen by 76 percent in England over the past 10 years,
    according to official statistics. In the 12 months from March 2014 to February 2015, there were 7,227 admissions
    for dog bites or attacks, 6.5 percent up on the previous 12 months and compared with 4,110 in the equivalent
    period a decade ago.”

    LAB REPORTS
    Moreover, research by Born Innocent of NHS 2015 full-year bite data versus 2014, shows there is a continued
    the trend, with a 5 percent rise in hospital admissions for bites, against a population rise of 0.6%.
    Indeed, when looking at the only source of statistics where dog breeds are named in bites – insurance
    claims – pet insurer Animal Friends revealed in its 2016 report that the breed with most bites reported is the Labrador
    Retriever, followed by the German Shepherd. The 2014 Paw research from veterinary charity PDSA states lack socialization/training and not taking dogs for walks are more likely to make them aggressive. The
    charity’s research also revealed that 34 percent of pet owners interviewed believe it is fine to leave a child
    unattended with a dog.
    anzit
    @Posted by
    writer and blogger, founder of Our Dogs Are Loved .

    Post a Comment