ISRAEL JOURNAL OF
VETERINARY MEDICINE
A MATTER OF DISPUTE - THE NEW REGULATIONS ISSUED BY THE
MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE, STATE OF ISRAEL, IN REGARD TO
DANGEROUS DOGS:
THE BAN OF BREEDING, IMPORTING, AND HOLDING OF CERTAIN
Vol. 59 (3) 2004
DOG BREEDS.
(A summary of the Hebrew version pages)
In the year 2002, the Knesset (Israeli Parliament) legislated the "Law of Dangerous
Dogs" which specified, in detail, all measures to be taken concerning aggressive/
dangerous dogs. (The complete wording is presented in the Hebrew version of this
issue). While under this law the term of dangerous dogs is clearly defined, no specific
dog breeds were declared as such. Recently, tragic events have occurred in which
Amstaff-like dogs attacked children, including one fatal case. Consequently, the
Ministry of Agriculture amended the law adding new regulations by which certain
dog breeds were declared as dangerous by breed definition. The breeds are: Bull
Terrier, Stafordshire Bull Terrier, Amstaff, Pitbull, Dogo Argentino, Filla Braziliero,
Tosa Innu and Rotweiller - this includes pure-bred as well as "look-alike" dogs.
The rational behind these regulations, issued by the Acting Director of the State
Veterinary Services, was that most of these breeds were bred specifically for dog
fighting, and therefore, are genotypically ruthless and dangerous. The Veterinary
Services of Israel only follows a small number of other countries in which partial or
all listed breeds have been banned.
These regulations evoked protest by pro-animal organizations as well as by the
veterinary community in Israel. In the Hebrew version one can find comments issued
by the Chairman of the Israel Medical Veterinary Association and two articles written
by veterinarians expressing their opposition to the new regulations.
The arguments against total banning of these dog breeds are summarized as follows:
One cannot define a dog as dangerous just by breed. In almost all breeds some
specimens could be aggressive, depending mostly on the way the dogs are raised. Any
abuse of careful dog breeding,correct education and professional training can lead to
aggression, which might be exploited by people. Dogs with massive bodies and jaws
incorrectly and irresponsibly raised by violence-prone owners can be regarded as
"dangerous". The responsibility for dog aggression is entirely reliant upon the person
behind the dog.
Until now, no "gene of aggression in dogs" has been found. Moreover, no specific
gene has been found which can define genetically each of the banned breeds;
therefore, the only possible way to identify the breed of a dog is by his pedigree as
issued by the kennel clubs.
In Israel, among the approximately 300,000 dogs, less than 10% are pedigreed
dogs. All the rest can be defined as look-alikes or mongrels. The same situation
applies to the banned dog breeds. Only a few are pedigreed dogs while the vast
majority are mongrels or look-alikes. (In all recent biting events none of the dogs
involved were pedigreed dogs). Almost all municipal veterinarians who will be
responsible for the implementation of the regulations are not dog breed specialists
and, therefore, will be unable to define non-pedigreed dogs - at least not to a point
which will stand up in court. In other words, only pedigreed dogs that are controlled
for breeding and behavior by the kennel clubs will be banned. The result being that
the Veterinary Services will defeat their objective of protecting the public by aiming
at the wrong dogs, letting the really dangerous dogs go uncontrolled.
The effort to reduce the level of aggression in dogs has to be focused on the dog
holders.
Like the creation of the various breeds themselves, individual dog behavior is also
"man made".
LINKS TO OTHER ARTICLES IN THIS ISSUE
1.