On Monday, 8 November 2021, a terrible tragedy took place at Penyrheol, near the town of Caerphilly in South Wales, when a ten-year-old boy was mauled to death at a house, by what was described by a neighbour as a “massive” dog. The “pet dog” itself went on to suffer the same fate at the hands of police firearms officers. Each year, similar reports continue to make the headlines in Britain, often prompting calls for sweeping, and mostly impractical measures, to address the problem of killer dogs.
The dog is commonly considered “man’s best friend”, and there is certainly no shortage of canine friends in the UK. Companion animal ownership actually increased during the Covid pandemic, only to leave many abandoned dogs in its wake as people began to understand the many responsibilities and the hidden costs of taking care of domestic pets. There are around 12 million domesticated dogs in the UK as of 2021, and 59 per cent of households own a dog, making the dog the nation’s favourite pet. Given the numbers involved, fatal dog attacks are thankfully rare. According to the Office of National Statistics, 78 people were killed by dogs between 1981 and 2015 in England and Wales, with the pit-bull terrier the breed most likely to kill.
The Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 was what might be considered a “knee-jerk response” to a spate of dog attacks that generated a media frenzy at the time. The Act identified four breeds of dangerous dogs: Dogo Argentino, Fila Brasileiro, Japanese Tossa, and the Pit Bull Terrier. But things are not so cut and dried. For a start, many other breeds of dog can also be considered potentially “dangerous”. Visual identification of dog breeds based on physical traits such as body size, skull shape, coat colour, and fur length and texture can be inaccurate, even when guided by identifier apps. Cross-breeding also ensures that many dogs are no longer purebreds and end up with mixed heritages. DNA analysis is thus the only reliable method of breed identification. Besides, it isn’t always the breed per se, but rather the individual dog’s temperament that makes it likely to attack humans, whether provoked or otherwise. The Dangerous Dogs Act thus currently applies to “dogs bred for fighting” and “other specially dangerous dogs”,
Dog attacks are mostly preventable, and reflect badly on both the dog as well as its owner. It is indeed a criminal offence to be in charge of a dog that is dangerously out of control and has bitten or attacked someone, irrespective of whether this happened in a public place or on private property. Such attacks, especially by larger and heavier breeds, can not only kill but also mutilate sufficiently as to require plastic surgery. Dog bites typically produce puncture wounds, multiple parallel lacerations, or actual avulsions of tissue. Large dogs can crush as well as tear off large segments of tissue and cause devastating injuries, especially in smaller humans.
Since it is not possible to predict when a dog is likely to attack, some basic rules, some of which might be considered plain common sense, need to be followed. Dogs should not be allowed to roam unleashed (according to the Canine Code), and even sometimes unmuzzled, especially on pedestrian paths and in public spaces where children play. Not everyone loves dogs and their unwanted attentions. Dogs should not be left alone with strangers and particularly with small children, even in one’s own household. Dogs must not be startled or teased in any way. Sleeping dogs must be left well alone and strange dogs must not be approached without their owner’s knowledge and permission. Prolonged and direct eye-to-eye contact may also threaten dogs. And finally, the warning signals of aggressive behaviour, as shown by changes in stance, facial expression, eye gaze, activity of the ears and the tail, and vocalisation (barking, growling, snapping), must not be ignored. Particular care must be taken to appropriately restrain dogs that repeatedly display aggression.
The reality is somewhat different. Freedom-loving members of the public cherish their personal liberties, which they also readily extend to their canine companions. Large dogs frequently run around unleashed and unmuzzled, often when the owner is distracted and not in full control. Dog-on-dog attacks are particularly common, with smaller dogs usually falling victim to larger dogs, whose indignant owners often deny they have ever misbehaved with others before. Dog owners can only be prosecuted if the victim of such an attack happens to be an assistance dog. Some dogs are also bred and reared specifically for their dangerous propensities, to either provide personal security or to guard property, as well as being displayed as a trophy by hard men, and more recently even hard women, in the making. Although dog fighting was banned in the UK as far back as 1835, sporadic reports of covert dog fights continue to surface from time to time.
Dog attacks will not go away, making their prevention a priority. Owners have to take more responsibility, especially when in charge of large dogs with powerful jaws that can inflict serious damage. It is a pity that dog licensing was abolished in England, Scotland and Wales by the Local Government Act 1988, even though dog licences are still required in Northern Ireland. Proof of dog ownership may thus depend solely on the conscientious implantation of a microchip. Good rearing practices, linking rewards with good behaviour, make a dog capable of socialising with others. Even dogs from so-called dangerous breeds can be brought up as good animal citizens. Given the wide prevalence of bad human behaviour in our society, it is premature to expect any imminent reduction in either dog-on-dog or dog-on-human attacks. In the meantime, the family of the latest, and most unfortunate, victim of an aggressive dog deserves our heartfelt sympathies and deepest condolences.
Ashis Banerjee (dog parent).