Dangerous dog breeds on the increase in East Lancashire

Chief Supt Chris Bithell during yesterday’s press conference

Chief Supt Chris Bithell during yesterday’s press conference

First published in East Lancashire
Last updated

THE number of dangerous and banned dogs destroyed by police across East Lancashire has risen by almost half in the past three years.

New figures obtained by the Lancashire Telegraph show that in 2011, 20 had to be put down after seizure by officers under the Dangerous Dogs Act.

Last year that total had risen to 29.

It follows the Telegraph revealing a similar increase in the number of dogs destroyed by Blackburn with Darwen Council after being collected wandering the borough’s streets by its wardens – 34 in 2012/2013.

The rise was put down to an increasing fashion for hostile looking dogs with some owners training their pets to be so aggressive they become uncontrollable and have to be abandoned.

A Freedom of Information request to Lancashire police revealed officers seized 25 dogs under dangerous dog legislation in 2011.

Of these, 13 were seized in the Eastern Division covering Blackburn with Darwen, Ribble Valley and Hyndburn and 12 in Pennine Division covering Burnley, Pendle and Rossendale.

From these dogs, 20 were put down – 12 in Eastern Division and eight in Pennine.

In 2012, 40 dogs were taken under the act – 21 in Eastern and 19 in Pennine.

A total of 23 were destroyed for being banned breeds or too dangerous to rehome. Of these 11 were from Blackburn with Darwen, Ribble Valley and Hyndburn and 12 from Burnley, Pendle or Rossendale.

By 2013, the number of seizures by the police had risen to 42 across East Lancashire.

Of the 22 taken by officers in Eastern Division, 19 had to be destroyed and of the 20 in Pennine, 10 were put down.

The Lancashire police figures for Dangerous Dogs Act seizures mirrored the trend seen by Blackburn with Darwen Council dog wardens.

The number of animals being destroyed by the council, with 34 put down in 2012/2013 contrasted with just nine in 2009/10.

Twenty-six of those were judged to be a banned breed, or too aggressive to be rehomed. The others were deemed too ill by vets.

Owners can be prosecuted if they are found to have abandoned their dog without ensuring its welfare.

The number of stray dogs collected by council wardens actually dropped in each of the four years for which figures were provided, from 412 in 2009/10 to 337 last year, but the amount being put down has increased sharply.

Nine were destroyed in 2009/10 and 13 in 2010/11 38 in 2011/12 and 34 in 2012/2013.

Tony Watson, head of environmental services at Blackburn with Darwen Council, said of the borough figures: “As an authority we do everything in our power to rehome stray dogs.

“Putting them down is a last resort.”

Comments (6)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

3:12pm Wed 12 Feb 14

rudis_dad says...

Perhaps they should try putting the owners down instead. Fewer brain-dead idiots, less demand for the dogs.
Perhaps they should try putting the owners down instead. Fewer brain-dead idiots, less demand for the dogs. rudis_dad
  • Score: 17

3:45pm Wed 12 Feb 14

noddy57 says...

rudis_dad wrote:
Perhaps they should try putting the owners down instead. Fewer brain-dead idiots, less demand for the dogs.
Excellent Idea,,after all its not the dogs fault is it ?
[quote][p][bold]rudis_dad[/bold] wrote: Perhaps they should try putting the owners down instead. Fewer brain-dead idiots, less demand for the dogs.[/p][/quote]Excellent Idea,,after all its not the dogs fault is it ? noddy57
  • Score: 3

5:30pm Wed 12 Feb 14

phil kernot says...

noddy57 wrote:
rudis_dad wrote:
Perhaps they should try putting the owners down instead. Fewer brain-dead idiots, less demand for the dogs.
Excellent Idea,,after all its not the dogs fault is it ?
A dog looks up to its master if it's taught to be aggressive it will be , but 9/10 its because the owner is a retard and sees the aggressive dog as a status symbol god knows why , a dog will challenge its owner from time to time its a pack thing , why have a dog that's powerfull than yourself , this will happen time and time again until the owners are made responsible and jailed , won't be so clever walking round the st with a aggressive breed will you then , ( before you say owt I have a dog but its a cavalier and he's never shown any sign of aggressive behaviour ). Your dogs behaviour is a reflection of how you are as a person )
[quote][p][bold]noddy57[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rudis_dad[/bold] wrote: Perhaps they should try putting the owners down instead. Fewer brain-dead idiots, less demand for the dogs.[/p][/quote]Excellent Idea,,after all its not the dogs fault is it ?[/p][/quote]A dog looks up to its master if it's taught to be aggressive it will be , but 9/10 its because the owner is a retard and sees the aggressive dog as a status symbol god knows why , a dog will challenge its owner from time to time its a pack thing , why have a dog that's powerfull than yourself , this will happen time and time again until the owners are made responsible and jailed , won't be so clever walking round the st with a aggressive breed will you then , ( before you say owt I have a dog but its a cavalier and he's never shown any sign of aggressive behaviour ). Your dogs behaviour is a reflection of how you are as a person ) phil kernot
  • Score: 8

7:50pm Wed 12 Feb 14

happycyclist says...

A sensitive topic at the moment. I think it's uncomfortable but relevant that a year ago a neighbour reported the dog that killed the young girl. Anyone who has one of these dogs around young children really should have a good look at themselves.
A sensitive topic at the moment. I think it's uncomfortable but relevant that a year ago a neighbour reported the dog that killed the young girl. Anyone who has one of these dogs around young children really should have a good look at themselves. happycyclist
  • Score: 4

10:25am Thu 13 Feb 14

Biggy12 says...

I know a few girls in accrington that fall under this catorgory ;-)
I know a few girls in accrington that fall under this catorgory ;-) Biggy12
  • Score: 0

3:39pm Thu 13 Feb 14

the white witch says...

Half the time it`s not the dogs fault, it`s the grown up owners fault in the beginning by leaving the dog with the child on it`s own, a dog does not understand that the child is to young to understand they cannot rag & pull a dog and the dog does not understand that it cannot harm the child as the dog is only defending what the dog itself feels as a threat. So why does owners leave dogs like this alone, they should know where the dog is at all times. and protect the child. But it`s always sad for the dog and even sadder when the child is harmed or killed. because of the parents.
Half the time it`s not the dogs fault, it`s the grown up owners fault in the beginning by leaving the dog with the child on it`s own, a dog does not understand that the child is to young to understand they cannot rag & pull a dog and the dog does not understand that it cannot harm the child as the dog is only defending what the dog itself feels as a threat. So why does owners leave dogs like this alone, they should know where the dog is at all times. and protect the child. But it`s always sad for the dog and even sadder when the child is harmed or killed. because of the parents. the white witch
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree