Banning XL bully dogs

[dyqik]

But lots of countries have requirements that all dogs be leashed in public areas. That seems to be something that everyone can live with.

This is definitely ABMCTT.

Many dogs have leash aggression, where they are aggressive on meeting dogs and some people while leashed, but fine meeting them while the dog is off leash. Leashes change dog body language and behavior, usually in undesirable ways.

Socializing and exercising dogs with leash aggression needs designated public spaces where they can be off leash. That doesn't need to include sidewalks etc. where they should be leashed for safety from traffic anyway, but should include some public parks at designated times, etc. This can also be a better way for dogs to be exercised by owners who can't walk them far.

[Woodchopper]

But lots of countries have requirements that all dogs be leashed in public areas. That seems to be something that everyone can live with.

This is definitely ABMCTT.

Many dogs have leash aggression, where they are aggressive on meeting dogs and some people while leashed, but fine meeting them while the dog is off leash. Leashes change dog body language and behavior, usually in undesirable ways.

Socializing and exercising dogs with leash aggression needs designated public spaces where they can be off leash. That doesn't need to include sidewalks etc. where they should be leashed for safety from traffic anyway, but should include some public parks at designated times, etc. This can also be a better way for dogs to be exercised by owners who can't walk them far.

I checked the local regulations (there's a requirement that dogs be leashed in all public areas for about six months in order to protect wildlife, and other requirements the rest of the year, with exceptions for specific dog parks). Dogs are supposed to be 100% under control at all times, including when leashed. So a dog with leash aggression would have to stay on private property if it wasn't allowed to be off leash. The advice is that leash aggression can be solved with training.

[dyqik]

But lots of countries have requirements that all dogs be leashed in public areas. That seems to be something that everyone can live with.

This is definitely ABMCTT.

Many dogs have leash aggression, where they are aggressive on meeting dogs and some people while leashed, but fine meeting them while the dog is off leash. Leashes change dog body language and behavior, usually in undesirable ways.

Socializing and exercising dogs with leash aggression needs designated public spaces where they can be off leash. That doesn't need to include sidewalks etc. where they should be leashed for safety from traffic anyway, but should include some public parks at designated times, etc. This can also be a better way for dogs to be exercised by owners who can't walk them far.

I checked the local regulations (there's a requirement that dogs be leashed in all public areas for about six months in order to protect wildlife, and other requirements the rest of the year, with exceptions for specific dog parks). Dogs are supposed to be 100% under control at all times, including when leashed. So a dog with leash aggression would have to stay on private property if it wasn't allowed to be off leash. The advice is that leash aggression can be solved with training.

It definitely can be controlled with training and effort, but the training involves extensive interaction with dogs in public spaces while on leash.

An dog with leash aggression is under control (assuming you are using the right harness etc.), unless it's too big/strong for the owner to control with a leash.

[purplehaze]

Suella Braverman has ordered 'urgent advice' on banning this 'breed' (it's not recognised as a breed in the UK).

Fatalities from dog attacks are really rare (single figures each year) though they are rising. The cause is unclear.

The breed that causes the most personal injuries claims is the labrador but it has been the most popular breed in the UK for years. The British Veterinary Association says that there's no evidence the Dangerous Dog Act has done anything to reduce aggression in dogs or the number of attacks, and advocates for "evidence-based, ‘deed-not-breed’ approach to dog control legislation".

Rather than ask the broader question of why are dog attacks increasing, the government once again seems to be reaching for the 'easy' yet completely illogical answer of banning a 'breed' of dog.

Braverman's reaction was over the top. Banning dogs, especially dogs bred for fighting, doesn't work because another similar type will be introduced to bypass the BSL laws - it's as vicious a cycle as the bite you will receive. I'm posting two viewpoints. One from the RSPCA and one from the bmj. The latter summarises the cost to the NHS re dog bites and injuries.

https://www.rspca.org.uk/-/blog-why-bsl-is-failing

https://www.bmj.com/content/381/bmj.p87 ... e%20period.

Stricter regulations need to be in place included all dogs on a lead in public places, except dog parks, and puppy sales.

[purplehaze]

To add:

Specifically leash control. It's clear that there's not a person on this planet that can control an out of control Bully XL who is on a lead. They are a type, not a breed. It's simply incredibly irresponsible to think or even consider that they can be controlled if in 'fight' mode.

I've seen in recent days disturbing videos of owners of Bully's: allowing their dogs to wander around in a residential estate without a lead or collar, on a side road as well. A person even had a picture of one with a 4 month old baby, with the description that they are not called nanny dogs for nothing.

Totally ignoring the elephant in the room. These dogs are dangerous, especially if out of control, which can happen in an instant.

[purplehaze]

This Is how dangerous dogs are dealt with in Spain.

Seems like a sensible approach.

Agree!

[shpalman]

To add:

Specifically leash control. It's clear that there's not a person on this planet that can control an out of control Bully XL who is on a lead. They are a type, not a breed. It's simply incredibly irresponsible to think or even consider that they can be controlled if in 'fight' mode.

I've seen in recent days disturbing videos of owners of Bully's: allowing their dogs to wander around in a residential estate without a lead or collar...

What difference does that make since you just said that they can't be humanly controlled even if they are on a lead?

[Sciolus]

For dogs usual methods of doing that in public areas are either to ban dogs completely from certain areas, or to require that dogs are kept on a leash or have to wear muzzles.

I would very much approve of having spaces where dogs weren't allowed, especially if there was also space where dogs specifically were allowed. Mixed-use spaces can be stressful for everyone. Dogs need space to run around and play with other dogs - they're social animals, after all. But there's very few spaces which are fenced off for dogs to use so you end up with owners having to let their dogs off in non-ideal places and then have low-level anxiety the entire time.

This isn't a problem just in the UK - when I lived in Ireland and Australia I struggled to find places where I felt safe to let my dog run. I usually ended up on sports fields where small groups of dog owners would congregate. The dogs would then play with each other and be more inclined to stay in a group than go running off. But I don't really want to be on sports fields. There's often people using them for exercise and they don't want a pack of dogs coming up to them. And, let's be honest, part of the reason we are taking them out is so they can urinate and defecate and who wants that on the grass you're playing sports on? Of course I clean up after my dog but not everyone does and even when you're diligent it's not like you can wash the grass/soil clean. I'd have loved a fenced in space specifically for dogs so that I didn't have to worry about my dog being off the lead or going up to someone. They are so rare though.

Where I used to live, I knew of exactly two outdoor places within 30-odd miles where dogs weren't allowed, both of which charged a non-trivial amount for entry. There were a couple of NT gardens which used to be dog-free, but they started allowing dogs a few years ago. Where I live now, I only know of one (which is both expensive and tiny). Anywhere else, the likelihood of encountering a dog is near enough certain. Hell, even cafes and food shops frequently have dogs in these days.

BTW, how many dog owners know it's already the law in England that dogs have to be kept on short leads on access land between March and July? IME experience, not many. You get a range of reactions when you inform people of this; putting their dog on a lead is one of the rarer ones.

[discovolante]

For dogs usual methods of doing that in public areas are either to ban dogs completely from certain areas, or to require that dogs are kept on a leash or have to wear muzzles.

I would very much approve of having spaces where dogs weren't allowed, especially if there was also space where dogs specifically were allowed. Mixed-use spaces can be stressful for everyone. Dogs need space to run around and play with other dogs - they're social animals, after all. But there's very few spaces which are fenced off for dogs to use so you end up with owners having to let their dogs off in non-ideal places and then have low-level anxiety the entire time.

This isn't a problem just in the UK - when I lived in Ireland and Australia I struggled to find places where I felt safe to let my dog run. I usually ended up on sports fields where small groups of dog owners would congregate. The dogs would then play with each other and be more inclined to stay in a group than go running off. But I don't really want to be on sports fields. There's often people using them for exercise and they don't want a pack of dogs coming up to them. And, let's be honest, part of the reason we are taking them out is so they can urinate and defecate and who wants that on the grass you're playing sports on? Of course I clean up after my dog but not everyone does and even when you're diligent it's not like you can wash the grass/soil clean. I'd have loved a fenced in space specifically for dogs so that I didn't have to worry about my dog being off the lead or going up to someone. They are so rare though.

Where I used to live, I knew of exactly two outdoor places within 30-odd miles where dogs weren't allowed, both of which charged a non-trivial amount for entry. There were a couple of NT gardens which used to be dog-free, but they started allowing dogs a few years ago. Where I live now, I only know of one (which is both expensive and tiny). Anywhere else, the likelihood of encountering a dog is near enough certain. Hell, even cafes and food shops frequently have dogs in these days.

BTW, how many dog owners know it's already the law in England that dogs have to be kept on short leads on access land between March and July? IME experience, not many. You get a range of reactions when you inform people of this; putting their dog on a lead is one of the rarer ones.

Sorry? Fishnut and Woodchopper were talking about a hypothetical situation where dogs aren't allowed (or have to be muzzled/leashed) in public by default, and also the fact that specific 'dog only' spaces are relatively few and far between. My local dog park (a large fenced off area specifically for dogs that you hire for yourself and your dog only, with no other random dogs or kids around) charges £15 per hour. Nice for the occasional group session but not really affordable for daily walks.

[Sciolus]

Sorry? I was talking about the actual situation where dogs are allowed virtually everywhere in public by default, and also the fact that dog-free spaces are exceedingly few and far between. My nearest dog-free space charges £9 per visit. Nice for the occasional visit but not really affordable for daily walks.

[Imrael]

BTW, how many dog owners know it's already the law in England that dogs have to be kept on short leads on access land between March and July? IME experience, not many. You get a range of reactions when you inform people of this; putting their dog on a lead is one of the rarer ones.

I wasn't. What's meant by "access land " please?

Edit. Found it - sort of. As defined by the 2000 Countryside and Right of Way act. Now to figure out of local bridleways are included.

[Sciolus]

BTW, how many dog owners know it's already the law in England that dogs have to be kept on short leads on access land between March and July? IME experience, not many. You get a range of reactions when you inform people of this; putting their dog on a lead is one of the rarer ones.

I wasn't. What's meant by "access land " please?

Edit. Found it - sort of. As defined by the 2000 Countryside and Right of Way act. Now to figure out of local bridleways are included.

Yes, aka right to roam land. The dogs-on-leads law does not apply to pre-existing footpaths or bridlepaths, even where they cross access land.

[Opti]

Another fatal dog attack in the UK.
Many of these fatalities could be avoided by adopting the Spanish system, all potentially dangerous dogs must be muzzled in public.
The criteria for 'potentially' dangerous dog' are outlined in my previous posts, but here they are anyway:

• Dogs that weigh more than 20kg and have strong musculature
• Dogs with bulky heads and short necks
• Dogs that are trained for attack
• Dogs with strong jaws and a wide mouth

Totally subjective measures, with very high penalties for non-compliance, mean that anyone with a PDD makes sure their dog is muzzled

[Tessa K]

Sunak says he'll ban them by the end of the year 'once the breed is defined '. Don't hold your breath.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-engl ... ocial_Flow

[jimbob]

Another fatal dog attack in the UK.
Many of these fatalities could be avoided by adopting the Spanish system, all potentially dangerous dogs must be muzzled in public.
The criteria for 'potentially' dangerous dog' are outlined in my previous posts, but here they are anyway:

• Dogs that weigh more than 20kg and have strong musculature
• Dogs with bulky heads and short necks
• Dogs that are trained for attack
• Dogs with strong jaws and a wide mouth

Totally subjective measures, with very high penalties for non-compliance, mean that anyone with a PDD makes sure their dog is muzzled

Looks pretty sensible.

[Opti]

Another fatal dog attack in the UK.
Many of these fatalities could be avoided by adopting the Spanish system, all potentially dangerous dogs must be muzzled in public.
The criteria for 'potentially' dangerous dog' are outlined in my previous posts, but here they are anyway:

• Dogs that weigh more than 20kg and have strong musculature
• Dogs with bulky heads and short necks
• Dogs that are trained for attack
• Dogs with strong jaws and a wide mouth

Totally subjective measures, with very high penalties for non-compliance, mean that anyone with a PDD makes sure their dog is muzzled

Looks pretty sensible.

It certainly appears to work. Research that I have seen noted 16 fatal dog attacks in 10 years. That seems somewhat less than the UK.

[dyqik]

Another fatal dog attack in the UK.
Many of these fatalities could be avoided by adopting the Spanish system, all potentially dangerous dogs must be muzzled in public.
The criteria for 'potentially' dangerous dog' are outlined in my previous posts, but here they are anyway:

• Dogs that weigh more than 20kg and have strong musculature
• Dogs with bulky heads and short necks
• Dogs that are trained for attack
• Dogs with strong jaws and a wide mouth

Totally subjective measures, with very high penalties for non-compliance, mean that anyone with a PDD makes sure their dog is muzzled

Looks pretty sensible.

Unless it needs more than two of the four elements, then many big soppy dogs like male Labradors would be covered by that, along with great pyrenean mountain dogs and St Bernard's.

[jimbob]

Another fatal dog attack in the UK.
Many of these fatalities could be avoided by adopting the Spanish system, all potentially dangerous dogs must be muzzled in public.
The criteria for 'potentially' dangerous dog' are outlined in my previous posts, but here they are anyway:

• Dogs that weigh more than 20kg and have strong musculature
• Dogs with bulky heads and short necks
• Dogs that are trained for attack
• Dogs with strong jaws and a wide mouth

Totally subjective measures, with very high penalties for non-compliance, mean that anyone with a PDD makes sure their dog is muzzled

Looks pretty sensible.

Unless it needs more than two of the four elements, then many big soppy dogs like male Labradors would be covered by that, along with great pyrenean mountain dogs and St Bernard's.

If they have strong musculature and weigh more than 20kg, then having them muzzled in public doesn't seem too extreme.

[dyqik]

Looks pretty sensible.

Unless it needs more than two of the four elements, then many big soppy dogs like male Labradors would be covered by that, along with great pyrenean mountain dogs and St Bernard's.

If they have strong musculature and weigh more than 20kg, then having them muzzled in public doesn't seem too extreme.

It absolutely is too extreme.

[Opti]

Unless it needs more than two of the four elements, then many big soppy dogs like male Labradors would be covered by that, along with great pyrenean mountain dogs and St Bernard's.

Labradors and Mastin Espanol, for example, don't have to be muzzled. Some of the Mastins are huuuuge. The law is applied pretty sensibly here. You can take your dog to the police station and they will tell you whether it needs a muzzle or not. Most Spanish treat their dogs as part of the family. There are recent laws that recognise dogs as 'sentient animals' who cannot be treated as property, e.g. as part of a trade/paying a debt or as a matrimonial chattel.

Except the hunters with their Podencos. There can be some gruesome sights hanging from trees in the Campo when the hunting season is finished.

[purplehaze]

It seems that the Government is going some way along the line of the Spanish route re Bully XL.

Chipped
Neutered
Licenced
Muzzled
Query on 3rd party insurance - sure I heard it was this morning on Radio 4

[Trinucleus]

It seems that the Government is going some way along the line of the Spanish route re Bully XL.

Chipped
Neutered
Licenced
Muzzled
Query on 3rd party insurance - sure I heard it was this morning on Radio 4

Sounds like the guy who was killed was attacked by dogs that had escaped from a house, where none of the above would have made a difference

[Boustrophedon]

Just as an aside, If you look at the Dangerous Wild Animals Act, you will find a lot of fairly inoffensive animals that you are not allowed to keep outside of a strong cage, including Red Pandas and some small cats, smaller than your average moggie. A cheetah on a lead is a complete no, no, despite a long history of domestication, but a fecking huge dog is somehow OK. The law is a mess.

[jimbob]

Just as an aside, If you look at the Dangerous Wild Animals Act, you will find a lot of fairly inoffensive animals that you are not allowed to keep outside of a strong cage, including Red Pandas and some small cats, smaller than your average moggie. A cheetah on a lead is a complete no, no, despite a long history of domestication, but a fecking huge dog is somehow OK. The law is a mess.

Felines probably are more dangerous per kilo of bodyweight than dogs. Their shoulders as well as jaws and claws..

[Tessa K]

Just as an aside, If you look at the Dangerous Wild Animals Act, you will find a lot of fairly inoffensive animals that you are not allowed to keep outside of a strong cage, including Red Pandas and some small cats, smaller than your average moggie. A cheetah on a lead is a complete no, no, despite a long history of domestication, but a fecking huge dog is somehow OK. The law is a mess.

Felines probably are more dangerous per kilo of bodyweight than dogs. Their shoulders as well as jaws and claws..

Also, felines are much harder to train as they're not pack animals (except lions).