Dog bites increasing in Victoria

Dog bite injuries have increased significantly since breed specific legislation was introduced in Victoria, according to hospital records.

Concerningly, the number of people admitted to hospitals for treatment (as opposed to being treated in the emergency department) has more than doubled to 770 in 2013/14.  At 43 injuries per 100,000 people in 2013/14 Victoria has a dog bite injury rate of more than twice that of Calgary when their responsible pet ownership model was introduced.

Seven people a day present to hospital with dog bite injuries in Victoria, on average.  Young children are most at risk of injury, particularly those under the age of four, and they are hurt predominantly in the head and face area.

When the three years prior to the first introduction of breed specific legislation in Victoria in 2002 are compared to the last three years, on average:

• total hospital visits have increased by 50%, resulting in an additional 786 presentations to hospital for dog bite injuries each year, and
• hospital presentations requiring admission for treatment have more than doubled from 342 to 744 per annum.

There is a correlation between increasing dog bite injuries and the key phases of breed specific legislation in Victoria.  The average hospital presentations have increased each time the legislation was ‘improved’.  While this highlights the ineffectiveness of restricted breed legislation, it also indicates simultaneous failures in other areas such as education.

If you are concerned about this increase, please make a submission to the parliamentary inquiry before Friday 10 July.

Bill Bruce encourages submissions

Bill Bruce, the man behind the world renowned ‘Calgary model’ of responsible pet ownership, is the Former Director of the Calgary Animal and Bylaw Services, City of Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

Bill is working with local Australian advocates to make a submission to the Victorian inquiry into the effectiveness of restricted breed laws in keeping the community safe.

Here’s Bill’s message to you all. Check out our submissions advice for help in making your own submission to the inquiry.

How to make a submission.

Submissions to the inquiry

Your submission is an important opportunity to have a formal say in the Parliamentary Inquiry into the effectiveness of breed specific legislation in protecting the community and achieving responsible dog ownership

Submissions are open until 10 July 2015 and can be emailed to eic@parliament.vic.gov.au or made using the online form.

We’ve provided a letter template below that you can send as is, or add your thoughts to.

* * * * * * * * * *

To the Economy and Infrastructure Committee

I ask that you consider the lack of evidence supporting breed specific legislation as a sound approach to community safety, and explore how proven alternatives focused on responsible canine guardianship can be implemented in Victoria.

Breed specific legislation has failed in Victoria, as it has failed elsewhere in Australia and overseas.  Breed laws are costly and ineffective at reducing dog bite injury, which is why they are being overturned in more jurisdictions than they are being enacted.

Victoria’s restricted breed clauses have not been effective in reducing dog bite injuries.  It has caused significant taxpayer expense to State and Local Governments, and suffering for families and their pets.  It is time for the Victorian Government to join those abandoning breed based approaches in favour of more effective approaches to keeping our community safe.

Breed based approaches are fundamentally flawed as a dog’s behaviour cannot be predicted based solely on its appearance or genetics alone.  Most factors attributed to dog bite incidents centre on how the dog is raised, kept and managed, including its early experience, health and socialisation.

There are proven, effective, alternatives that focus on responsible canine guardianship through education and incentives.  The Committee should aspire for Victoria’s animal management systems to be world’s best practice.  Components of this system would include registration, microchipping, desexing, education, training, socialisation, health and regulation of threatening and nuisance behaviour.

Effective dog bite prevention is based on sound scientific understanding of dog behaviour and risk factors for dog bite injuries. As dog bite prevention is about managing dog and human behaviour the Committee should seek advice from experts in dog behaviour and education, as well as animal management policy specialists in jurisdictions with successful programs.

While my personal submission is relatively short, I am aware that Bill Bruce is co-authoring a report providing a detailed submission to the Committee, and the authors have my support.