Dangerous Dogs Act 1991

Amanda Dunckley made this Freedom of Information request to Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council This request has been closed to new correspondence. Contact us if you think it should be reopened.

The request was successful.

Amanda Dunckley
Unknown

Dear Sir or Madam,

I am contacting you concerning the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991, as amended, legislation.

1) How many dogs have been seized by the council under Section One of the Dangerous Dogs Act in each year from 2000 to 2008?

2) How many prosecutions under Section One of the Dangerous Dogs Act did the council proceed with in 2007 and 2008?

3)How many dogs have been seized under Section One of the Dangerous Dogs Act so far this year (2009)? Of those seized, how many have been signed over for destruction by their owners?

4) How many applications have been made to the Magistrates court under section 4b of the Dangerous Dogs Act in the last three years?
Of those 4b applications, how many resulted in destruction orders and how many resulted in registration onto the Index of Exempted Dogs?

5) How many dogs are currently held under Section One of the
Dangerous Dogs Act by Oldham Borough Council?

6) How many dogs have been handed over by their owners to Oldham Council dog wardens as dogs prohibited under the Dangerous Dogs Act - illegally owned pit bull terrier types?

7) How many dogs held as stray dogs by your council have been identified as "pit bull type" during 2007, 2008 and so far this year 2009? Of those stray dogs identified by council dog wardens as prohibited types-what number were destroyed by Oldham Council?

8) How are Oldham Borough Council dog wardens trained to identify prohibited types of dogs as defined by the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 legislation?

Thank you.

Yours faithfully,

Amanda Dunckley

Link to this Report
Nicola Jumeaux, Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council

show quoted sections

Dear Ms Dunckerley

I acknowledge with thanks your request for information received at this
office on 20/04/2009 regarding Dangerous Dogs Act 1991. This request has
been considered as a request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

Your request may take up to 20 working days to be processed, and has been
passed onto our Environmental Protection group.

Please be advised that if an exemption applies to the information that you
have requested, the statutory period may be exceeded in accordance with
the provisions of that Act.

Should you have any queries, please contact me on the number below.

Yours Sincerely

Nicola Jumeaux

Development Support Officer

Oldham Council

Level 13 Civic Centre

0161 770 3307

[2][email address]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

As a public body, the Council may be required to disclose this email [or
any response to it] under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, unless the
information in it is covered by one of the exemptions in the Act.

This note confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence
of computer viruses, however we advise that in keeping with good IT
practice the recipient should ensure that the e-mail together with any
attachments are virus free by running a virus scan themselves. We cannot
accept any responsibility for any damage or loss caused by software
viruses.

[3]http://www.oldham.gov.uk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
2. mailto:[email address]
3. http://www.oldham.gov.uk/

Link to this Report
cth admin, Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council

show quoted sections

1) How many dogs have been seized by the Council under Section One of the
Dangerous Dogs Act in each year from 2000 to 2008?
2000 - NONE
2001 - NONE
2002 - NONE
2003 - NONE
2004 - NONE
2005 - ONE
2006 - NINE
2007 - TWENTY ONE
2008 - TWENTY FOUR

2) How many prosecutions under Section One of the Dangerous Dogs Act did
the council proceed with in 2007 and 2008?
2007 - TWO
2008 - NONE
(Note: Greater Manchester Police took over all prosecutions from mid 2007)

3) How many dogs have been seized under Section One of the Dangerous Dogs
Act so far this year(2009) ? of those seized, how many have been signed
over for destruction by their owners?
TOTAL DOGS SEIZED - NINE
SIGNED FOR DESTRUCTION - ONE

4) How many applications have been made to the Magistrates court under
Section 4b of the Dangerous Dogs Act in the last three years? Of those
applications, how many resulted in destruction orders and how many
resulted in registration onto the Index of Exempted Dogs?
OLDHAM MBC - NONE
(Greater Manchester Police - unknown)

5) How many dogs are currently held under Section One of the Dangerous
Dogs Act by Oldham Borough Council?
NONE

6) How many dogs have been handed over to Oldham Borough Council dog
wardens as dogs prohibited under the Dangerous Dogs Act - illegally owner
pit bull terrier types?
TWENTY FIVE

7) How many dogs held as stray dogs by you council have been identified as
"pit bull type" during 2007, 2008, and so far this year(2009)? of those
dogs identified by council dog wardens as prohibited types - what number
were destroyed by Oldham Council?
2007 and 2008 - 11 and 14 - ALL DOGS HANDED TO GREATER MANCHESTER POLICE
2009 - NINE SEIZED - 4 DESTROYED

8) How are Oldham Borough Council dog wardens trained to identify
prohibited types of dogs as defined by the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991
legislation?
SENIOR ANIMAL WARDEN IN POST AND DEALING WITH PIT BULL TERRIERS PRIOR TO
THE DANGEROUS DOGS ACT 1991.
USED METRPOLITAN POLICE CONSULTANTS WHEN DEALING WITH FIRST CASES IN 2006.
ATTENDED MERSEYSIDE POLICE DOG LEGISLATION TRAINING COURSE ON IDENTIFYING
PROHIBITED DOG TYPES.
ONGOING PRACTICAL TRAINING WITH REGULAR VISITS TO PIT BULL TERRIER HOLDING
KENNELS, DOG IDENTIFYING CONSULTANT TO MANCHESTER DOGS HOME AND
ASSOCIATION OF GREATER MANCHESTER AUTHORITIES.
USESD AS COURT WITNESS BY GREATER MANCHESTER POLICE.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

As a public body, the Council may be required to disclose this email [or
any response to it] under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, unless the
information in it is covered by one of the exemptions in the Act.

This note confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence
of computer viruses, however we advise that in keeping with good IT
practice the recipient should ensure that the e-mail together with any
attachments are virus free by running a virus scan themselves. We cannot
accept any responsibility for any damage or loss caused by software
viruses.

[2]http://www.oldham.gov.uk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
2. http://www.oldham.gov.uk/

Link to this Report