This was announced in the Irish Times on Saturday 7 July 2007. If there was ever any question as to why we have to fight Breed Specific Legislation NOW, then here's your answer.
As a result of this unbelievable piece of local legislation, many many dogs will find themselves being abandoned, put to sleep or worse, in a country where the pounds are already overstretched.
PLEASE do what you can TODAY to help stop more tragedies like this one from happening!!
Eleven breeds of dog, including Rottweilers, Bull Terriers and German Shepherds have been banned from all Dublin City Council properties, including houses, flats and estates, with immediate effect.
The council has said it will give tenants an opportunity to rehouse the animals but if alternative suitable accommodation cannot be found for them they will be destroyed.
The council has taken the step to remove all "dangerous breeds" due to the increasing numbers of complaints from tenants and because of the legal implications associated with an attack taking place on one of its properties. The ban initially applies to council housing and all public areas within council estates.
However, the council plans to amend its bylaws to include public parks in the ban. This would mean that anyone owning a dangerous dog could not walk it in a public park, even if they lived in private housing.
'Dangerous Dogs' under Irish law
The council has also written to the Minister for the Environment asking him to ban all breeds of fighting dogs nationally. The 11 breeds are not banned for general ownership in Ireland but must be muzzled, kept on a special leash and be under the control of a person over 16 years old.
The breeds are: English Bull Terrier, Staffordshire Bull Terrier, American Pit Bull Terrier, Rottweiler, German Shepherd (Alsatian), Doberman, Rhodesian Ridgeback, Japanese Akita, Bull Mastiff, Japanese Tosa and Bandog. Cross-breeds of these dogs or crosses of these dogs with any other breed are also banned.
Executive manager of the council's housing department Michael O'Neill said tenants would be asked to remove any banned dogs but if they failed to comply the council would take them away. "Our information on these dogs is that that they can be very aggressive and while they might be family pets, that has to come secondary and would be no defence to us if a child or other vulnerable person was attacked on our property."
Delighted owner Lyn Kenny
A delighted woman was told on 6 June that her dog Red would be coming home.
Dog owner Lynn Kenny and acknowledged behaviourist Lyn Fleet withstood harsh questioning from Merseyside police officers during a long awaited trial. They were supported by lawyer Trevor Cooper, who is regarded as an expert in animal law. Red, who by Merseyside police is regarded as a "pit bull type", will now be neutered, microchipped and tattooed, before being placed onto the Index of Exempted Dogs and released from the kennels where he has been kept since having been seized. He will have to be kept on lead and muzzled in public places for the rest of his life. This does not alter the fact however, that a family pet will be able to live out his life with the family who knows and loves him.
A second dog was not so lucky. The judge ordered for the animal to be destroyed, a decision which was not contested by the owner.
Wednesday June 13th saw the return to court of Scott McEvoy who was continuing his fight for the return of his dog Rio. The case had already been adjourned twice previously due to lack of court time for the case to be properly heard.
Mr McEvoy had been assisted in the preparation of his case by founder and Trustee of local charity Animals in Need, Ms Fran Ellis, who had engaged the services of a respected trainer and behaviourist to provide an independent assessment of Rio. On the previous adjourned hearings Mr McEvoy had been represented by canine law specialist Trevor Cooper. Unfortunately he was unable to attend the final hearing because of prior commitments.On the day Mr McEvoy was assisted by Melanie Rushmore of The BullBreed Advisory Service who acted as a Mackenzie friend and was given rights of audience on Mr McEvoys behalf.
Scott McEvoy et all after court case
Acknowledged canine behaviourist and trainer Mr Guy Richardson had assessed Rio the day prior to the court case.
In his report he wrote that "Rio appears to be sound in temperament and is intelligent and responded in a positive way to all my tests. She demonstrated that she reacts well to training and is keen to interact. She has obviously been cared for correctly by her owner and has been socialised well with people." He concluded: "I would strongly recommend that she be returned to her family as soon as possible".
Confronted with the evidence, the judge concluded that Rio was not a danger to the public and should be allowed to be entered onto the Index of Exempted Dogs, under the same conditions as Red.
Mr McEvoy and his partner who were both very emotional as judgement was made are delighted that they will soon be reunited with a much loved member of their family.
While this was so far the least positive outcome of the court cases with dogs' lives at stake, DeedNotBreed thinks it is important to bear in mind the previous court cases which have seen a total of 47 dogs to be allowed to returned home. Having spent an amount well into a five figure sum on the seizing of so-called "dangerous dogs", Merseyside police will want to finally see results, and with an operation this extensive it is bound to get some at last. DeedNotBreed however can't help but wonder what the results would have been if Chief Constable Bernard Hogan Howe and his team had been devoting as much time and resources on fighting those who are involved in dog fighting and related crimes.
When asked, many people agree that legislation regarding dogs (or indeed all animals!) should focus on the treatment and behaviour of the owner. But other than that, a lot of people are still unsure what all the fuss is about. The article below will tell you all about the current Dangerous Dogs Act (and why it's such a useless piece of legislation):
DANGEROUS DOGS ACT 1991
Fifteen years ago, Rukhsana Khan was savagely attacked by a Pit Bull Terrier. This was the catalyst for one of the most infamous laws ever passed by a British government.
There had been other incidents in the early nineties, some involving Rottweilers but these didn't catch the public's attention as much as the attack on six-year-old Rukhsana in Bradford, West Yorks in May 1991.
Graphic images of the young child in hospital with horrific injuries were shown on television and in newspapers. The media frenzy whipped up the nation's hysteria until in July, bowing to public pressure, the Government hastily passed the 1991 Dangerous Dogs Act.
The Act made it a criminal offence to own, breed from, sell or exchange four breeds of dogs: the Japanese Tosa; the Dogo Argentino; the Fila Braziliero and the Pit Bull Terrier. Anyone who owned these types of dogs or their crossbeeds had until November 1991 to apply to have their dog entered on the Index of Exempted Dogs, as long as they fulfilled certain strict requirements including having the dog neutered and muzzled and on a lead in a public place. After that time, it would be a criminal offence to own one of these types of dogs. If found guilty of this offence, the owner would be prosecuted and the dog would be destroyed.
Any dog suspected of being one of the banned breeds had to be identified as such and here the problems started.
The most prevalent of the four banned breeds in the UK was the Pit Bull Terrier but unlike the Rottweilers that were involved in similar incidents around the same time but were never banned, there was no 'breed standard' to judge them against as the Pit Bull Terrier was not recognised by the UK's Kennel Club or the Government as a pure breed.
In July 1993, the Queen's Bench Divisional Court decided that:
"They could properly conclude that a dog was of the type known as the pit bull terrier if its characteristics substantially conformed to the American Dog Breeders Association's standard."
However, by UK standards, the ADBA's definition of an American Pit Bull Terrier lacked clarity and DEFRA later issued their own set of guidelines to assist in identifying this breed.
Some of the criteria includes:
a short, single coat
ears that fold forward or sideways
a muzzle that is not pointed
height between 45cm - 55cm
Both sets of guidelines are extremely vague and generalised and as crossbreeds were also included under the DDA, a dog didn't necessarily need to have all the points listed to fit the description. It's possible that many medium-sized dogs could be incorrectly identified as a 'type known as a Pit Bull Terrier' based on these guidelines.
As it was compulsory for all illegal dogs to be neutered under the conditions of the DDA, it was expected that the breeds would soon become extinct in the UK. Using the vague guidelines, hundreds of dogs were seized, suspected of being illegal 'types' and were kennelled in secret locations pending legal proceedings which in many cases took years. For a social animal like a dog, being imprisoned with little or no human contact for such a long time led to many dogs suffering from 'kennel stress' and their welfare in custody was also questioned by leading canine organisations.
In March 1997, the DDA Amendment Bill was passed following pressure from animal welfare organisations which, amongst other things, enabled owners charged under Sections 1 and 3 to register illegal dogs on the Index of Exempted Dogs if the owners could prove that their dog was not a danger to the public and that they themselves were responsible owners.
Fifteen years after the Dangerous Dogs Act was first introduced to protect the public, two Rottweilers mauled to death an unattended baby in Birmingham and five-year-old Ellie Lawrenson was killed by her uncle's Pit Bull Terrier in the early hours of New Years Day 2007, in St. Helens, Merseyside.
Following the tragedies, Lord Kenneth Baker who was Home Secretary when the DDA was first introduced called for more breeds of dogs to be banned. Merseyside's Chief Constable, Bernard Hogan-Howe, responded by initiating a 'dog amnesty' which the Kennel Club likened to a 'dog cull' and innocent family pets that had committed no crime were seized and in some cases destroyed.
Neither actions will prevent future tragedies because the DDA is fundamentally flawed. It makes the assumption that only certain breeds of dogs are likely to be involved in attacks on people when, in truth, all dogs are capable of inflicting harm but in reality, rarely do.
The DDA was hastily drawn up in two months following the groundswell of public opinion. It never addressed the root of the problem which was and still is, irresponsible owners with untrained dogs. Sadly, if the Government continues to ignore advice from leading canine experts there will be further human tragedies and more innocent family pets will die.
After sixteen years, it is clear that this act does little to protect the public and in its present form, never will.
DeedNotBreed is an organisation of concerned, responsible dog owners. The organisation was set up as a reaction to the so-called 'amnesty' of dogs that were deemed to be of pit bull type, in the Merseyside area, as a result of the tragic death of Ellie Lawrenson. The 5 year old girl was found dead with severe injuries, after having been left unsupervised with her uncle's dog, which was later on defined as a pit bull terrier.
DeedNotBreed believe that any dog, regardless of breed, when treated wrongly, can have the ability to do harm. Assuming that a dog will be a danger to society based on its breed is wrong: it is bad or inadequate training and care that will cause a dog to become a danger.
DeedNotBreed wants to bring about a change in the law, whereby the responsibility for the dog's behaviour is squarely put with the dog's owner. Anti-social behaviour of a dog now results in the dog being put to sleep, while the owner gets away with a very mild punishment and, in most cases, the freedom to acquire another dog and potentially repeat the same sad scenario.
Besides the all-important change in the law, DeedNotBreed wants to educate the public about responsible dog ownership. Responsible dog ownership is the key to a good relationship between man and his companion for thousands of years. Dogs that are being treated well and handled responsibly won't ever be a threat to society. Irresponsible dog ownership, on the other hand, is at the root of many of the tragedies that have been making headlines lately, and have cost injuries to people and many a dog their life.
Since its inception, DeedNotBreed has supported many worried dog owners, who felt that their dogs were being persecuted, based on their looks. A great number of dogs were being seized during the week long 'amnesty'. Dozens of owners did not want to sign their dogs over to condemn them to death and found themselves having to endure months of uncertainty, not knowing where their dogs were or how they were doing, and, most importantly, if they were ever going to see them back. The long wait culminated in several court cases, during which all but one dog were allowed to be added to the Index of Exempted Dogs and return home. A massive victory for all those involved!
DeedNotBreed has held a couple of very successful meets in Liverpool, the city at the heart of the 'amnesty'. Hundreds of members of the public, many of them concerned dog owners themselves, came to listen to what we had to say and show their support.
The official launch of DeedNotBreed was during Crufts in March of this year. The Kennel Club is an important supporter and kindly enabled us to make ourselves known to a wide audience. Celebrity dog trainer Victoria Stilwell showed her supported, as have Robert Mugford and the Dog Borstal team.
All of the DeedNotBreed committee members are volunteers, none of us receive a penny for the work we do and often pay expenses out of our own pockets. We are committed to achieving the goals that are described above, BUT
WE CAN'T DO IT WITHOUT YOUR HELP!!
We hope you've enjoyed our first newsletter. DeedNotBreed is committed to speaking up for those dogs that are being judged by their breed, on the way they look, nothing else.
We want to bring about a change in the law, whereby it's the owners actions and/or treatment of their dogs that stand trial, NOT the breed of the dog. At the same time we want to educate people on the importance of responsible dog ownership.
These are big ambitions, and we need YOUR HELP to achieve them!! The most important key to a change in the law, and more educated dog owners are YOU!!
WRITE TO YOUR MP
We would like to contact as many MP's as possible to gauge their interest in discussions on the DDA. However, MP's can only be contacted by their local constituents and sometime even then they don't answer
Therefore we would like you to contact your MP (Member of Parliament), and raise your interest in their opinions on the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 and Amendment (1997) *please note the amendment is not applicable to Northern Ireland.
You can locate your MP, using the link below, to write to and find out information about them here: www.theyworkforyou.comHere is a link to a template letter that you can use. Please feel free to amend the letter to make it more personal to your views.
If you use the "write to them" site to send a question, it is advised that you amend the letter as they don't like "identikit" letters.
We would be very interested in hearing all responses or non-responses from your MP's so that we can identify where we can gain support or we need to target to get more support.
If you need any help, then please feel free to contact us.
WRITE TO YOUR LOCAL NEWSPAPER
Ever since the tragic death of Ellie Lawrenson the media have been hungry to
print more "shocking" stories about "ferocious dog attacks". Every
misbehaving dog, regardless of the reason, is being described as a "savage
monster", with the journalist having little or no regard for the real facts.
Has your local newspaper printed a story about dogs, whether good or bad?
Write to them!
If you have dogs, of the same or similar breed especially, as
the dog featured in their story, tell them how good your dogs are, how they
are enriching your and you're family's life etc.. You get the idea. Remember
to mention that it's the owner who is responsible for the dog's behaviour,
regardless of the breed (and if you could mention DeedNotBreed, that'd be
fab!).
LEAFLETS
We need to get the word out there, amongst other responsible dog owners, who and what DeedNotBreed is and what we stand for.
In order for that to happen we need leaflets to be distributed EVERYWHERE: Your vet's practice, the other vets practices in your local area, pet shops, training, agility, fly ball clubs, your library, town hall..... You get the idea - and you'll surely have a few great ideas yourself too.
Now Great Britain IS great: it's massive! So we need YOU to cover your local area. Don't worry if you only have an hour to spare or no car to drive round: we only need you to do WHAT YOU CAN.
So as not to have to spend vast amounts of money on printing and postage, please visit our How you can help page, to download and print the leaflets.
If you are not able to distribute the leaflets, please consider giving a small financial contribution to someone who is able to cover your or another area, but could do with a few pounds towards printing costs.
GIVE THEM A RING
Many radiostations, local, regional and national, have talkshows where they
ask the public to phone in. They are interested in what you have to say:
you, the listener, make their programme.
So if your opinion on "dangerous
dogs" is being asked, give them a call!
PLEASE, WHENEVER YOUR LETTER OR PHONE CALL IS PUBLISHED OR MENTIONED, LET US KNOW!
GO TO A DOG SHOW
Is there a dog show being organised in your area?
Why not take a few
leaflets and posters down - or even better, have a lot and do a stall!
You might be asked for a small contribution for the stall, and it's always best
to contact the organisers first to explain what you'd like to do and ask if
they'd mind.
Some might not mind but simply don't have any more space for a
stall. In that case - or if you are a bit worried about doing a stall on
your own - ask a friendly looking stall holder if you can leave some
leaflets on a corner of their stall.
