Dublin City Council bans 'dangerous dog breeds'

Olivia Kelly

Eleven breeds of dog, including Rottweilers, Bull Terriers and German Shepherds have been banned from all Dublin City Council properties, including houses, flats and estates, with immediate effect.

The council has said it will give tenants an opportunity to rehouse the animals but if alternative suitable accommodation cannot be found for them they will be destroyed.

The council has taken the step to remove all "dangerous breeds" due to the increasing numbers of complaints from tenants and because of the legal implications associated with an attack taking place on one of its properties. The ban initially applies to council housing and all public areas within council estates.

However, the council plans to amend its bylaws to include public parks in the ban. This would mean that anyone owning a dangerous dog could not walk it in a public park, even if they lived in private housing.

The council has also written to the Minister for the Environment asking him to ban all breeds of fighting dogs nationally. The 11 breeds are not banned for general ownership in Ireland but must be muzzled, kept on a special leash and be under the control of a person over 16 years old.

The breeds are: English Bull Terrier, Staffordshire Bull Terrier, American Pit Bull Terrier, Rottweiler, German Shepherd (Alsatian), Doberman, Rhodesian Ridgeback, Japanese Akita, Bull Mastiff, Japanese Tosa and Bandog. Cross-breeds of these dogs or crosses of these dogs with any other breed are also banned.

Executive manager of the council's housing department Michael O'Neill said tenants would be asked to remove any banned dogs but if they failed to comply the council would take them away. "Our information on these dogs is that that they can be very aggressive and while they might be family pets, that has to come secondary and would be no defence to us if a child or other vulnerable person was attacked on our property."

Labour councillor Kevin Humphreys said he understood council tenants may feel discriminated against, but he hoped that this was just the first step to banning these breeds nationally.

© 2007 The Irish Times

http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/frontpage/2007/0707/1183751555449.html

Wow, on the other side of the pond too.  It's everywhere.

That is Bull-shit..........I am an avid GSD lover. Yes big dogs can bite, but where does the safety of the family lie. What is next no guns, oh wait they probably have allready taken them huh. What is next no bats in the house because someone might get hit by it.  people need to stand up, especially the ones that voted those decision makers into office. You should make a BIG STINK about it..........

the worst dog bites i've ever had were from a toy poodle and a jack russell. the only time i was bitten by a big dog (105 lb golden ret) was when i was dumb enough to try to break up a dog fight between him and my female chow/husky mix. as soon as he bit they both stopped and sat next to each other, the fight was over and they didn't do it again. would i endorse banning jacks and poodles - never. if any given dog is proven dangerous, then he should be confined or banned or destroyed, but an entire breed? nuts. i'm not a big fan of pits, but a neighbor has a tank of a pit named Magic and he's an absolute angel. my dogs are companions and protection for our selves and home.  we have guns too, but dogs are probably the best deterrent there is. i'm not a right-winger, but man, too many no common sense people are making the rules on this planet. i'm w/xeus - make a BIG STINK about it!

This is flat getting scary! Anyone tries to take my dogs and they will have to pry my 357 mag from my cold dead fingers! Who in the he_l keeps coming up with these laws! ?? Pretty soon we will need permission to use the bathroom!

What about service dogs? Are they going to ban GS seeing eye dogs???

Grrrrrrr!!!

Talk about Big Brother! What about St. Bernard's? They can be down right nasty, too! And there's a brazilian dog, I can't think of the name, that's bred to fight, the one I met was a Holy terror, went thru a door to try to get at us (a closed door)...they're not on the list....yes, I WOULD say descriminatory!!!! jo

I have just read the article in Saturdays Irish Times on Dublin City councils decision to ban certain breeds of dogs from council properties. This decision causes me great concern for a number of reasons. How did the Council reach the decision about dangerous breeds? What criteria were applied and who advised them on this decision? Did the Council consult with any of the animal welfare organisations that are now going to have deal with a huge increase in abandoned and unwanted dogs as a result of this decision? Were they consulted as to the wisdom or otherwise of such a decision. How many other options were explored before this decision was reached?

Be VERY assured that I have sent out your decision to all my friends – urging them to contact you PERSONALLY  to voice their total disgust and displeasure at your unilateral and illegal decision banning family pet dogs.

The Council, before reaching their decision, should have sought the advice of people who deal with animal welfare on a daily basis. Such organisations are by and large lobbying for responsible legislation that states that it should be dealt with by “deed not breed”. Any dog can have the capacity to be aggressive depending on how it has been treated by human beings. Such legislation would also allow for degrees of offences and remedies required by the owners as opposed to wholesale destruction of dogs by virtue of the fact that they have a specific breed name.

Such draconian actions and legislation that supports such actions has proven in other areas to be a resounding failure. This decision will result in a number of things:

• Distraught families and children who have to hand over beloved family pets either for re-homing or destruction with no responsible assessment of the individual dog and its owners.
• Irresponsible owners, particularly those who use their dogs for fighting and who breed dogs for the same purpose will most certainly not hand their dogs over and will instead put them into hiding and carry on with their cruel practices even further from the public eye.
• Amnesties will be offered by councils to those owners to hand their dogs over and this will fail also.
• Many dogs will now be abandoned or thrown on to the streets for animal welfare organisations to pick up and take responsibility for. These organisations are generally under resourced anyway and this will result in the needless cull of many dogs.
• The whole area of fighting dogs is a very lucrative one and it will now be driven further underground and people will make even more money out of this cruelty to animals.

In short the Council has been very irresponsible and rash in taking this decision with very little thought for the consequences. The focus should be on the behaviour of the owners and not the dogs and this issue can be addressed with responsible ownership not destruction.

Regards,
(your name)

It's funny.  (not really).  Most of the worlds deaths and injuries are caused by alcohol and vehicles, yet, no one bans them.  Especially not alcohol in Ireland (I'm Irish/German, so I can say that).

One or two people in the whole country get attacked by a big dog and they want to ban 10 different breeds, yet cars and alcohol kill thousands in the same country and they issue slogans (don't drink and drive).  Maybe we should just have a slogan or two, like maybe "where the hell is your child".

Sure, there are gonna be people who get bit by dogs, every year, forever, but few and far between.  How many kids get "picked up" on internet chat sites by perverts, but they don't ban computers.

Governments want to control everything.  Eventually we will not be able to get by without them.  I guess that works for them.  Sad, just sad.