Ennvironment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee Written evidence submitted by Stan Rawlinson

I note that despite the majority of people that gave input were against BSL regarding changes to the DDA, it appears that as a committee you ignored those concerns. You actually suggested adding to the four already on the banned. The Mastiff was one of the possible breeds mentioned.

Three of the four on the list already are types of Mastiffs (Also part of the Mollosoid group of dogs).

Your terminology, or may I say the reported terminology. The term Mastiff covers a wide range of dogs that include the Great Dane, British Bulldog, Shar Pei, Newfoundland, Pyrenean Mountain Dog, St Bernard and the Staffordshire Bull Terrier.

There are currently 47 dog breeds that come under the umbrella of Mastiff.

My Concerns come from experience and working within the DDA for some considerable time As yet, no one has managed to prove that genetics alone determines the behavioural outcome of any animal. Therefore stating that nurture/socialisation plays no part must be open to serious question.

Eugenics is the word we sometime use for the atrocities that were carried out by the Nazis in the second world war. They believed that in the name of selective breeding, it was acceptable to wipe out races of people that did not fit their Aryan ideals.

History now shows that this was an evil and misguided regime. Millions lost their life because of their hereditary and genetic background. I fervently hope that in the future the eugenics fostered on breeds of dogs that are deemed to be genetically bad, will be looked on in the same revulsion and horror as that Nazi regime.

By banning specific breeds, the legislators have effectively stated that breed/genetics alone determines the behavioural outcome. If we take that to its logical conclusion, then surely all animals, including humans are born either bad or good, depending on genetics, race or breed.

I am heavily involved with the DDA as an expert witness and assessor. That said, I believe the concept of BSL is intrinsically flawed. Training, socialisation and behavioural manipulation, creates changes in behaviour. That is a fact. I would be redundant as a behaviourist, if that were not the case.

To state that nurture, socialisation, education and training has no impact on an individual or animal, must surely be wrong. The assumption that genetics only determines the outcome of behaviour flies in the face of all known psychological and behavioural studies. That must suggest BSL is based on a totally false premise. If that is the case then the act should be overhauled, rather than just tinkered with, by add-on laws and knee jerk reaction sound bites.

I believe comprehensive “dog bite” legislation, coupled with better consumer education and legally mandating responsible pet keeping practices, and control orders are a better solution than breed-specific legislation to the problem of dangerous dogs. I believe the figures speak for themselves since BSL, the incidence of dog bites have increased.

April 2013