Dangerous Dogs Act was 'knee-jerk' and flawed, says Battersea Dogs Home, 25 years on

Battersea Dogs and Cats Home has today released a report called 'What's breed got to do with it?' which marks 25 years since the Government banned pit bull terriers, the dogo Argentino, the Japanese tosa and fila Brazileiro in the UK.

The report criticises the law for banning dogs based solely on looks, rather than on behaviour.

One of Battersea's resident pit bulls is Francis, an 18-month-old who will be put down on Tuesday, July 26. 

Francis with his Battersea Home handler. Pic: PA.

The Dangerous Dogs Act (1991) means Battersea is duty bound to end his life because of the Section One requirements. 

Last year, the home took in 91 pit bull terrier types, which it says proves breeding has not stopped, simply been forced underground. 

Claire Horton, Battersea's chief executive, said: "This new research by Battersea sets out the failings of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 in focusing on how a dog looks, rather than on anything that it has done or the actions of its owner.

"There are, of course, some dangerous dogs on our streets but for a quarter of a century this legislation has condemned too many innocent dogs to be put to sleep whilst systematically failing to reduce dog attacks in our communities.

"Battersea is dismayed that this outdated, knee-jerk piece of legislation is still on the statute books. There is a clear need to replace it with a law that targets irresponsible owners."

For the report, Battersea Dogs and Cats Home spoke with 215 professional dog behaviour therapists and trainers to assess why dogs bite people and the role of the breed.

Of the 215 professionals, 74 per cent said breed was either not important or only slightly important in aggression levels.

Those who believed breed does influence aggression could not agree on what breeds were more aggressive, with collies and small terriers mentioned as often as German shepherds, according to the report. 

Most trainers agreed the way the dog was brought up is the biggest influence, with 86 per cent saying the aggression was based on the way it was brought up and 73 per cent saying its upbringing before it is sold is the most important factor. 

Pic: PA

Nearly 90 per cent agreed educating owners and others to read dog body language is crucial for preventing dog bites, while 78 per cent support compulsory training of all new dog owners. 

Trevor Cooper, Battersea's legal consultant and dog law solicitor, said the "law must be repealed" because "assuming a dog is dangerous because of the way it looks just doesn't stand up to scrutiny".

The report states: "Some breeds are more high maintenance in terms of exercise, owner input, stimulation, enrichment, etc and if these are not fulfilled by the owner there is a higher danger of frustration, which can lead to behaviourial issues."

The report closes by stating training and better regulation should be used in the UK instead of banning breeds outright.

The report concludes: "Banning specific breeds cannot be justified when faced with this evidence – it implies that some breeds are dangerous and others are safe, an approach rejected by behaviourists.

"Breed specific legislation should therefore be repealed."

In response to Battersea's research, a Government spokeswoman said: "Dog attacks can have horrific consequences for victims and families, so the prohibition of certain types of dog under the Dangerous Dogs Act is crucial to help us deal with the heightened risk they pose.

"Any dog can become dangerous if it is kept by irresponsible owners in the wrong environment which is why the Act covers any type of dog that is dangerously out of control."