Snuffles Has Been Described as ‘Friendly and Comical’ - Shame He’s Going to be Killed
Posted By Alison Green Date: 1/05 Posted Under: Breed Specific Legislation, Dangerous Dogs“Friendly and comical” but Snuffles must die.
A Ballymena dog warden is calling for changes to the Dangerous Dogs legislation after a court ruled that family pet Snuffles is a banned pit bull type and ordered his destruction. The Irish dangerous dogs legislation does not include the 1997 amendment meaning any dog deemed to be pit bull type must be destroyed regardless of whether or not they are of good temperament.
A report in the Ballymena Times stated:
Despite giving evidence in the successful prosecution, Nigel Devine has called for changes to the Dangerous Dogs legislation to allow pit-bulls to be kept under strict licence.
He said he had visited Snuffles on several occasions, and had always found it to be ‘friendly’ and even ‘comical’.
“As the law stands, Snuffles will be put down because he is classified as a dangerous dog. But I have been in contact with this dog frequently, and he is very friendly towards humans. Personally I do not see him as any danger to humans.
“He is a real family pet, just like any other dog, but he will now have to be put to sleep. It will be a very sad day when Snuffles is put down for me and the people who have been looking after him since he was seized.”
Mr Devine who has been instrumental in tackling the issue of dangerous dogs, said the Ballymena Council has written to the Environment Minister Michelle Gildernew calling for changes to the legislation
The article goes on further to publish part of the letter sent by Ballymena Council which points out that Mr Devine has never had to deal with an alleged pit bull type attacking any person and asks for the dogs to be judged on their temperament and not their appearance.
“The officer within Ballymena Borough Council who has the responsibility for enforcing this legislation is Nigel Devine, the Borough Warden, and his efforts to enforce this legislation are well known throughout the province. He led the council into its Pit Bull amnesty and was very successful in dealing with most of the local problems in this Borough with pit bulls and pit bull crosses.
“He, like all other Enforcement Officers, has experienced considerable difficulty in establishing what is deemed to be a dangerous dog, specifically a Pit Bull type, and what is not. At present identification of these dogs is difficult as there are few experts available who can state, especially in the case of crossbreeds, exactly what the dog is.
“When the legislation is so specific, the outcome of court cases is very much dependant upon one experts opinion against another, a factor which is difficult for both the enforcement officers and the Courts. On the other hand, if the legislation required witnesses to speak about the dogs temperament and behaviour there would be no problem in deciding what a dangerous dog was and convincing the Courts accordingly.
“It should also be borne in mind that the breed types specified in the Dangerous Dogs Order are big powerful dogs which under the correct circumstances can severely harm or kill humans and the question has to be asked if there are there any circumstances under which these dogs can be considered as domestic pets?
“What we feel should be in place are other control measures to deal with these dogs as outlined below.
“It is recommended that dogs be divided into categories for the purpose of this legislation and each category be dealt with differently as per the attached schedule. This would allow individuals to keep previously dangerous dogs under certain circumstances, and include other dogs in the legislation.
“During our Borough Wardens years of controlling dogs and investigating numerous dog attacks in our Borough area, he has never to date investigated a pit bull attacking anyone.
“To remove a dog for destruction after it has settled into a home as a pet is a traumatic experience for everyone concerned especially if the dog has shown no aggressive tendencies.
“This Councils view is that no dog should be judged on how it looks, but rather on its behaviour.”
At least the Irish are looking to make drastic changes to their legislation and not hiding behind the alleged “political climate”.
Author DetailsAlison is a long time dog owner and dangerous dog legislation observer who lives with her family and four Bull Breed dogs in Sussex. - See this author's webpage
Popularity: 10% [?]
Thursday, May 1st, 2008 at 6:10 am and is filed under Breed Specific Legislation, Dangerous Dogs. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
While I would support any call to repeal DDA s1 and reform the way dangerous dogs are dealt with I find this ‘call’ from Mr Dewvine and Ballymena Council very confusing.
‘Deed not breed’ is all very well but if it is not in any way preventative, simply responding to potentialy serious incidents, it doesn’t actually move our ability to ‘deal with’ danger caused by owners and their dogs forward at all.
It would appear that the basis for this is that those concerened with delivering the law have come up against a dog (Snuffles) which they like. There must be some awfuly bad dogs in NI if this is the first time it has happened to them and I am certainly thankful for the reforms provided under 4B (which removed mandatory destruction from cases in which I have been involved).
But what EXACTLY are they proposing?
“What we feel should be in place are other control measures to deal with these dogs as outlined below.
“It is recommended that dogs be divided into categories for the purpose of this legislation and each category be dealt with differently as per the attached schedule. This would allow individuals to keep previously dangerous dogs under certain circumstances, and include other dogs in the legislation.”
What is a ‘previsously dangerous dog? What other dogs are proposed to be included in ‘the legisaltion’?
Most unfortunately the article doiesn’t carry the proposals for this dog ‘categorisation’ but what is written suggests to me that big dogs which could damage humans, wnatever their breed, would be covered as ‘potential’ dangers - unless perhaps the dog warden fell in love with them as well - or should all perfectly innocent big dogs be subjected to muzzling, holding on a lead etc.
Vague proposals, proposals like these and those suggested by the Kennel Club and others to Alex Neil MSP are potentially even more dangerous than the Act which exists.
Approaches which have been considered for much longer appear not to be attractive - perhaps because they are not proposed by soemone reacting emotionally to a single case.
I’m sure it won’t be long before soembody suggests that any revision be called Snuffles Law.
As with any proposal it needs looking at in great depth. To add more breeds or types would be a huge mistake however to at least remove mandatory destruction would be a step forward.
By this little information at least being made public more people should become aware and are then able to contact their own representitives with their views on it rather than it all being done behind closed doors.
All depends on who people see as their representatives and what those representatives then do behind those closed doors.
my friend’s family have a pit bull dog and a couple of times now it has tried to snap at my hands, I know that my friends mum somtimes encourages this dog to go for limbs while play and fusses it after it jumps up all over you although she does’nt intentially it to make her dog aggressive. I dont think she realises how potentially dangerous her dog could be and I’m so worried because the dog will be around children a lot during summer,
is there any way to report a potentially dangerous dog anonymously? I dont want my best friend and her family to hate me but at the same time I would hate one of the small children to get ingured or worse Help!
Depends on where you live Lauren.
If you are in the UK the Pit Bull Terrier remains by law a prohibited dog and both the police and your local authority have a responsibility in that respect; but it depends on where you live in the country as to whether either would follow up, especially on an anonymous complaint. You could try CRIMESTOPPERS (0800555111) which maintains anonimity but would pass on your concerns to the police in your area.
You have correctly identified the kind of stupid and irresponsible behaviour:
“encourages this dog to go for limbs while play and fusses it after it jumps up all over you”
which people with any kind of dog do not appear to realise sets up the potential for what they will later call “tragic accidents” - with little dogs they can get away with it with the larger dogs soemone else will usually suffer.
You are being a good friend Lauren and seem capable of delivering sensible advice to your friends - get them to join a reputable dog club, get them to do something positive with their dog and if they still don’t listen to you perhaps it’s time to review your friendship.
I wish you the very best of luck.