Sir, – In "Dog bites, deer droppings and public health protection" (June 15th), George Winter quotes Páraic Ó Súilleabháinas as stating that "the number of people hospitalised for dog bites rose 50 per cent between 1998 and 2013, following the introduction of breed-specific legislation", implying that the increase is in some way related to breed-based dog control legislation. This increase in dog bite injuries is correlation, not causation. The increase in human population, changes in the way dogs live in people's homes and other factors will have played a role in this statistic.
The restricted breed regulations were specifically introduced to apply restrictions, additional to those of the Control of Dogs Act 1986, to certain breeds that, because of their size, conformation and muscularity, are more capable of inflicting serious or life-threatening injuries than other types of dog if they became aggressive. The regulations do not ascribe an increased tendency to aggressive behaviour to the listed breeds.
A properly trained dog has no difficulty wearing a muzzle for short periods of time when in public places. People who own these breeds were aware of this need when they acquired their dogs; if they do not wish to muzzle their dog, they should have chosen a different breed.
Of course it would be better for the dog and its owner if the muzzle was not a legal requirement. However, on the rare occasions when dogs have killed people, the media carry images of “killer” and “savage” dogs, and this has created fear of certain breeds among sections of the Irish public. As a result, some people are reassured when they encounter dogs, and restricted breeds in particular, wearing a muzzle. The concerns of people who are irrationally scared of dogs deserves to be respected when they seek to enjoy public spaces.
As it happens, I believe that “deed not breed” legislation, such as Scotland has introduced, is likely to be more effective and appropriate than the current Irish breed-based regulations. Under this model, restrictions are placed on dogs following incidents of bad behaviour. However, I respect the opinions of the veterinary surgeons who work for the local authorities who are responsible for human safety in public areas. They believe that the current regulations are of significant benefit for public safety in relation to dogs. Any repeal of the current legislation would first require suitable legislative alternatives to be put in place, in order to maintain public confidence and safety. – Yours, etc,
PETE WEDDERBURN,
Veterinarian,
Bray,
Co Wicklow.