The Veterinary Association (TTVA) has expressed concern about the Dangerous Dogs Act in its present form and has suggested changes, especially with respect to the breeds of dogs which fall under the legislation. The association did so in a media release yesterday about the act, which is scheduled to take effect on August 1.
In the release, the TTVA said legislation was necessary, but the act in its current form was flawed. They believe the act should not be breed-specific. "Reactive negative responses against a particular breed should not be the motivation for having or amending the Dangerous Dogs Act," stated the release.
While the act has garnered more support since Tuesday in light of the attack on pregnant Point Fortin mother Kurleen Cooper, the TTVA said dog owners, not dogs, need to feel the brunt of the law. "The TTVA extends condolences to all victims of dog attacks, and our members are sympathetic of the pain that victims endure.
However, we strongly advocate against punishing the dogs but rather we should be shifting our focus onto owners. Any intelligent lawyer can see through the many flaws in the Dangerous Dogs Act, which contains too many loopholes in its current form."
Cooper was attacked by three dogs, including a pitbull, and suffered injuries to her arm, face and genital area. Pitbull terriers, Fila Brasilero and Japanese Tosa are the three breeds specified in the act. The TTVA has also expressed concern that the Ministry of Local Government, which has the mandate to enforce the act, does not have the resources to do so.
They are also questioning the act's stipulation that dogs must be spayed or neutered, which they say may be an impossible feat for local vets to perform in three months. The TTVA has recommended that the act be amended to define a dangerous dog as "any dog that is dangerously out of control, any dog that injures a person or has a history of aggression and any dog that behaves in a way that makes a person worried it might injure them."
