BVA and BSAVA's updated position statement calls for a centralised dog bite database.

BVA and BSAVA update thier joint policy position on the Dangerous Dogs Act (1991).

British vets are calling for an evidence-based, ‘deed not breed’ approach to dog control legislation for the sake of public safety and animal health and welfare.

In an updated position statement - published ahead of the 30th anniversary of the 1991 Dangerous Dogs Act - BVA and BSAVA reiterate their call to the Government for a repeal of Section 1 of the Act and express concern in defining particular breeds as ‘dangerous’. 

The move follows research by the organisations that found no reduction in the prevalence of aggressive behaviour and dog-biting incidents since the institution of the Act. Vets have also voiced concern over the potential negative welfare impacts on dogs seized that are suspected of being a prohibited breed type. 

“We have long campaigned for a total overhaul of the 1991 Dangerous Dogs Act because it targets specific breeds rather than deeds and gives a false impression that dogs not on the banned list are ‘safe’,” said BVA senior vice president, Daniella Dos Santos.

“Evidence gathered as part of our recent policy update further supports our view that breed-specific legislation has been ineffective in its intended aims, thereby failing to properly protect the public or safeguard dog welfare over the last three decades.” 

Section 1 of the Dangerous Dogs Act bans the ownership of certain breed types perceived as being a risk to public safety. Among these include the pit bull terrier, Japanese Tosa, Dogo Argentino, and Fila Brasileiro.

The recommendations set out in BVA and BSAVA’s updated policy position include: