1 Jul 2021
The BVA has renewed its calls for an overhaul of the controversial legislation following publication of a damning RSPCA report that describes the current law as a “dog’s dinner”.
Joshua Silverwood
Job Title
The RSPCA’s report comes ahead of the 30th anniversary of the Dangerous Dogs Act. Right, a dogo Argentino, a prohibited breed under breed specific legislation. Dogo Argentino image © thereseb87 / Pixabay
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.
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.
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”.
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UK Government responds to the scientific research, follows in the footsteps of other nations around the world that have repealed breed-specific legislation and do not just what is right for dogs, but for public safety, and ensure both are better protected.”
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.
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.”
