Written evidence submitted by the Association of Pet Behaviour Counsellors (DDL0184)
The Association of Pet Behaviour Counsellors (APBC) represents an international network of pet behaviour counsellors that have achieved the highest proven academic and practical standards available in the field of companion animal behavioural therapy.
To summarise:
How effective is the Government’s current approach to protecting the public from dangerous dog attacks?
1. Given that fatal dog attacks have risen since the introduction of Breed Specific Legislation (Office for National Statistics), as well as the number of hospital admissions for dog bites (Hospital Episode Statistics, Health and Social Care Information Centre), it is clear that the current approach is not protecting the public from dog attacks.
2. APBC members are regularly asked to assess dogs with a bite history, and a variety of different dog breeds and types are involved. There is no evidence to suggest that restricted breed types are more likely to bite, nor any different in their bite style/ability to cause serious damage than any other breed. Indeed, stereotyping of breed types can lead to individuals believing that non-prohibited types are safe which has the potential to inadvertently contribute to more dog bite incidents. A number of studies show that, in terms of occurrence of aggressive behaviour, variation within a breed can exceed variation between breeds. Clearly breed or appearance is not an appropriate criterion to assess a dog’s risk to people.
3. Conditions of exemption include keeping an exempted dog on a lead and muzzled in a public place. Both measures compromise welfare as they reduce the range of behaviour a dog is able to display – despite exempted dogs having been assessed and deemed not to be a threat to public safety apart from their physical characteristics.
What changes, if any, should be made to the current approach and legislation?
4. As the current approach is not protecting the public from dangerous dog attacks, as well as compromising the welfare of both seized and exempted dogs, the APBC believe that current legislation should be altered.
5. Reduction and prevention of incidents require a focus on education and improving responsible dog ownership, responsible behaviour around dogs and responsible breeding.
6. Recording of all information related to dog bite incidents to a national database so evidence-based preventative measures can be identified. More thorough investigation is required of the circumstances leading up to the bite to ascertain why the dog bit a person, not just reporting of the bite incident itself.
7. The APBC believe that adding more breeds to the banned list would have no effect in preventing dog attacks.
8. Tighter regulation of the dog industry including those who are breeding, training and modifying behaviour of dogs.
How can local authorities and police forces be best supported in reducing the number of dangerous dog-related incidents?
9. The cost benefit of repealing BSL could instead be put towards education courses.
10. Section 3 of the Dangerous Dogs Act, the Dogs Act (1871) the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act (2014) should be sufficient to reduce the number of dangerous dog-related incidents if they are enforced properly.
11. Local authorities and police should be educated in dog behaviour by members of appropriate bodies such as those registered with the Animal Behaviour and Training Council to ensure knowledge and competency.
What lessons could the UK learn from other countries dealing with similar issues?
12. In Italy, BSL was withdrawn after a short period. Current legislation requires public and veterinary professionals to report any dog that might be considered ‘a risk’ (bite risk to humans, dogs or other species, or otherwise difficult to manage) to the authorities. Any owner of a dog with a bite history that fulfils certain criteria must attend a behaviour consultation and education course comprising 10 hours. All dog bites are included on a national database.