Opinion – UK XL bully ban will ultimately fail to prevent dog attacks

In the specific case of American XL bullies, it’s openly acknowledged that the breed isn’t even legally recognised and that there’s no real clue just how large the population is within the UK – not even a round-about estimate.

Given this, how is it fair to make any concrete assertions about the breed having inherently aggressive tendencies without considering the caveat that the number of bites recorded may be disproportionately skewed.

In laymen’s terms, there may be way more XL bullies currently in the UK than other large breeds featuring highly in fatality lists, like rottweilers, dobermans, alsatians, and malamutes. Until the population-size is better established, attack regularity stats are essentially worthless.

Many dog safety evaluations have suggested that breeds reported to bite ‘the most’ are simply the most popular breeds present within a certain region. Furthermore, there is little scientific evidence to support the notion that any breeds have an aggressive or dangerous disposition.

Animal welfare charities such as the RSPCA, Blue Cross, and the Kennel Club instead argue that dogs should be judged on their ‘deed not breed’ and blame external factors that, for whatever reason, aren’t being addressed.

XL bullies have become a ‘valuable commodity, resulting in irresponsible breeding, rearing, and ownership, which can contribute to an increased likelihood of aggression,’ a joint letter reads.

An undercover investigation by the BBC in January revealed extensive links between unlicensed XL bully breeders and organised crime, where hundreds of dogs are bred specifically for exaggerated characteristics like large heads and overly muscular bodies.

Now, for a moment consider the types of people using these dodgy networks to buy bullies and their motivations.

‘Where do you draw the line? This will be the end of his career, hopefully not the end of his life.’

Animal Behaviourist, Jordan Shelley, says he is ‘devastated’ by Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s announcement that the American XL Bully dog will be banned by the end of this year. pic.twitter.com/bxWDgUvlSJ

— GB News (@GBNEWS) September 15, 2023

This is where inflammatory colloquial terms like ‘devil dog’ start to enter the public consciousness and spread, gradually making people feel fearful and stand-offish. This also further entices the types of delinquents that should never be allowed to own dogs in the first place.

Love and discipline should always be the most basic pre-requisites for owning any domestic animal, and yet many large dogs are viewed as a mere tool for intimidation, are neglected, and miss crucial social milestones in their early development.

I personally have zero qualms with people wanting governmental action to ensure safety for themselves and their loved ones, but I vehemently believe the brunt should be bared by the root cause of the issue – not the animal in the collar, the animal holding the leash.

Why instead of pursuing futile breed bans, which have proven to be unfit for purpose and a tragic waste of life, is the government seemingly opposed to undertaking a holistic approach to incentivise and punish those responsible for their dogs?

The concept of dog licenses isn’t new. In the Canadian city of Calgary, all dogs over three months old are required to be registered and micro-chipped, or the owners risk regular fines.

Not only does this detail deter potentially unfit owners from reaching out to breeders or shelters in the first place, but it has led to 90% of Calgary’s entire dog population becoming registered. For context, the city has a population of roughly 1.336 million people and some 135,000 dogs.

A subsidised spay and neuter program is smartly offered as part of the deal too, ensuring low-income families can afford to sterilise their dogs and that local authorities get the owner’s details locked into the system.

This is an astute move considering a reported 85% of fatal attacks globally have involved un-neutered dogs.

Here in Spain if you have a dog that’s on a list of dangerous dogs you have to have a license which entails going for a test to make sure you can handle the dog, a criminal check, a psychological test, training, chipped, insured and must be muzzled in public, why not do this

— lisa (@mgmespana) September 18, 2023

Now, obviously, you’d be foolish to expect such a sparkling success rate if mandatory dog licenses came into effect in the UK, but surely efforts to know where dogs of interest are residing and who they’re owned by is a preferable tactic to worthless bans.

The crux of the issue, I believe, is that irresponsible owners are raising generation upon generation of large and powerful dogs on fear and neglect. And, speaking frankly, most of these people couldn’t give a solitary shit about any ban. The illegal breeder networks must be targeted.

As someone who previously rescued a 70kg cane corso who categorically could not be mixed with strangers or other animals, and provided him with a wonderful life without incident, I’m unwaveringly convinced that owners are responsible for their pet’s actions at all costs.

Until animal welfare and ownership accountability come to the forefront of the conversation, I’m convinced the annual uptick in dog attacks, tragically, will continue.

For the foreseeable, however, it looks as though we’ll have to grit our teeth through Sunak’s feeble, lip-service soundbites.