Out of control dogs
Date of request: 23 May 2023
Reference: 688/23
Request
As a freedom of information request, please provide monthly and annual totals from 2018 up until the most current date available at the point of production for the following:
- The number of times the offences of an out-of-control dog causing injury has been recorded
- The total number of dogs seized each year
- The number, seized each year of: a) suspected banned breeds, b) suspected American Bully or ‘XL bully’ breed
- The number of dogs seized, split by weight
- The number of dogs destroyed each year.
- The number of dogs destroyed each year, with a breakdown, if available of suspected banned breeds and suspected American bully breeds
Response
In responding to your request, we have located information from different sources within the Avon and Somerset Police. For example, while our Finance team hold complete records of all dog seizures based on invoices, this does not include whether the seized dog was a banned breed. Our dangerous dogs team do hold information hold information regarding banned breeds seized, but only in relation to those seized for particular reasons such as for being dangerous or out of control. We have provided the information below insofar as it is held, with an explanation of these issues for each question.
- The number of times the offences of an out-of-control dog causing injury has been recorded
We have undertaken a search for occurrences recorded under the following Home Office offence code:
- 008/21 – Owner or person in charge allowing dog to be dangerously out of control in any place in England and Wales (whether or not in a public place) injuring any person or assistance dog
The table below shows all occurrences recorded under this offence code in timeframe requested, broken down by month and year from January 2018 to April 2023.
| 008/21 | ||
| Owner or person in charge allowing dog to be dangerously out of control in any place in England and Wales (whether or not in a public place) injuring any person or assistance dog | ||
| 2018 | Jan 2018 | 30 |
| 2018 | Feb 2018 | 23 |
| 2018 | Mar 2018 | 40 |
| 2018 | Apr 2018 | 39 |
| 2018 | May 2018 | 42 |
| 2018 | Jun 2018 | 54 |
| 2018 | Jul 2018 | 58 |
| 2018 | Aug 2018 | 54 |
| 2018 | Sep 2018 | 57 |
| 2018 | Oct 2018 | 46 |
| 2018 | Nov 2018 | 41 |
| 2018 | Dec 2018 | 36 |
| Sum 2018 | 520 | |
| 2019 | Jan 2019 | 42 |
| 2019 | Feb 2019 | 39 |
| 2019 | Mar 2019 | 50 |
| 2019 | Apr 2019 | 61 |
| 2019 | May 2019 | 56 |
| 2019 | Jun 2019 | 47 |
| 2019 | Jul 2019 | 58 |
| 2019 | Aug 2019 | 76 |
| 2019 | Sep 2019 | 44 |
| 2019 | Oct 2019 | 41 |
| 2019 | Nov 2019 | 37 |
| 2019 | Dec 2019 | 37 |
| Sum 2019 | 635 | |
| 2020 | Jan 2020 | 47 |
| 2020 | Feb 2020 | 34 |
| 2020 | Mar 2020 | 35 |
| 2020 | Apr 2020 | 51 |
| 2020 | May 2020 | 68 |
| 2020 | Jun 2020 | 55 |
| 2020 | Jul 2020 | 66 |
| 2020 | Aug 2020 | 52 |
| 2020 | Sep 2020 | 49 |
| 2020 | Oct 2020 | 28 |
| 2020 | Nov 2020 | 35 |
| 2020 | Dec 2020 | 36 |
| Sum 2020 | 509 | |
| 2021 | Jan 2021 | 36 |
| 2021 | Feb 2021 | 30 |
| 2021 | Mar 2021 | 55 |
| 2021 | Apr 2021 | 52 |
| 2021 | May 2021 | 56 |
| 2021 | Jun 2021 | 62 |
| 2021 | Jul 2021 | 56 |
| 2021 | Aug 2021 | 55 |
| 2021 | Sep 2021 | 60 |
| 2021 | Oct 2021 | 38 |
| 2021 | Nov 2021 | 49 |
| 2021 | Dec 2021 | 35 |
| Sum 2021 | 584 | |
| 2022 | Jan 2022 | 37 |
| 2022 | Feb 2022 | 38 |
| 2022 | Mar 2022 | 49 |
| 2022 | Apr 2022 | 58 |
| 2022 | May 2022 | 67 |
| 2022 | Jun 2022 | 81 |
| 2022 | Jul 2022 | 65 |
| 2022 | Aug 2022 | 78 |
| 2022 | Sep 2022 | 49 |
| 2022 | Oct 2022 | 34 |
| 2022 | Nov 2022 | 40 |
| 2022 | Dec 2022 | 45 |
| Sum 2022 | 641 | |
| 2023 | Jan 2023 | 62 |
| 2023 | Feb 2023 | 46 |
| 2023 | Mar 2023 | 53 |
| 2023 | Apr 2023 | 57 |
| Sum 2023 | 218 | |
2. The total number of dogs seized each year
| Year | Total |
| 2018/19 | 106 |
| 2019/20 | 123 |
| 2010/21 | 98 |
| 2021/22 | 142 |
| 2022/23 | 176 |
The above data includes all dogs seized for any reason (including welfare, out of control, banned breed, injured and no owner etc) based on information held by our finance department. Totals are shown for financial years from 1st April to 31st March and are drawn from invoice paid dates. This may mean some small differences as to when the dogs were seized should the invoice have been received after the end of the financial year. Providing this data broken down by month is not readily available and would take over 18 hours to extract, which would attract a refusal under Section 12 of the Act. As a result, we have not broken your request down further, but have provided the information partly in the form you requested it.
3. The number, seized each year of: a) suspected banned breeds, b) suspected American Bully or ‘XL bully’ breed
For dogs seized due to being out of control, information is held by our dangerous dogs team in relation to part a). For any seizures not dealt with by this team, this information is not recorded. We have provided data below, insofar as it is held. Information broken down further into specific type of breed is not recorded by the dangerous dogs team, nor centrally recorded. To identify an answer to question b) would therefore require a manual review of each record. It is estimated this would take in excess of 18 hours to extract, which would attract a refusal under Section 12 of the Act. Providing this data broken down by month is not readily available. As a result, we have not broken your request down further, but have provided the information partly in the form you requested it.
| Year | Total |
| 2018 | 11 |
| 2019 | 22 |
| 2020 | 15 |
| 2021 | 46 |
| 2022 | 26 |
4. The number of dogs seized, split by weight
We have conducted research on our systems, and we have not identified any information relating to this question.
5. The number of dogs destroyed each year.
| Year | Total |
| 2018/19 | 22 |
| 2019/20 | 26 |
| 2020/21 | 21 |
| 2021/22 | 28 |
| 2022/23 | 49 |
The above data shows totals for financial years from 1st April to 31 March. It is drawn from invoices paid dates which may mean some small differences as to when the dogs were seized should the invoice have been received after the end of the financial year. Providing this data broken down by month is not readily available and would take over 18 hours to extract, which would attract a refusal under Section 12 of the Act. As a result, we have not broken your request down further, but have provided the information partly in the form you requested it.
6. The number of dogs destroyed each year, with a breakdown, if available of suspected banned breeds and suspected American bully breeds
The number of dogs destroyed each year is recorded in question five. As stated, this was based on information held by our Finance team, based on invoices. However, the information held by Finance is not broken down by breed type.
We also hold information within our Data Insight Team in relation to the approved destruction of property. Within the property category, the way in which this is recorded is destruction by breed, not suspected banned breed. This allows us to answer your question, based on information held by Data Insight, in relation to suspected American bully breeds only. This is provided below.
You will note we have included all records where the property classification includes ‘destruction approved’, as well as those listed as ‘destroyed’. Having reviewed this type of data previously, we have identified issues with accuracy in the recording of this data; in some cases, while a dog has been listed as destroyed, upon further review it was apparent that a dog control order was used.
| American Bull Breeds – Destroyed/Destruction approved | Sum of count |
| 2018 | 2 |
| Aug | 1 |
| American Bulldog | 1 |
| Evidential;Seized;Disposal – destruction approved | 1 |
| Dec | 1 |
| American Pit Bull Terrier | 1 |
| Evidential;Seized;Disposal – destruction approved | 1 |
| 2019 | 5 |
| Jan | 1 |
| American Pit Bull Terrier | 1 |
| Seized;Disposal – destruction approved | 1 |
| Jun | 1 |
| American Pit Bull Terrier | 1 |
| Evidential;Disposal – destruction approved | 1 |
| Aug | 1 |
| American Bulldog | 1 |
| Destroyed | 1 |
| Nov | 2 |
| American Bulldog | 2 |
| Evidential;Seized;Involved in accident;Disposal – destruction approved | 2 |
| 2020 | 5 |
| Apr | 1 |
| American Pit Bull Terrier | 1 |
| Recovered;Disposal – destruction approved | 1 |
| May | 1 |
| American Bulldog | 1 |
| Seized;Disposal – destruction approved | 1 |
| Oct | 2 |
| American Bulldog | 1 |
| Disposal – destruction approved | 1 |
| American Pit Bull Terrier | 1 |
| Disposal – destruction approved | 1 |
| Dec | 1 |
| American Bulldog | 1 |
| Seized;Disposal – destruction approved | 1 |
| Grand Total | 12 |
Section 12 of the Act makes provision for public authorities to refuse requests for information where the cost of dealing with them would exceed the appropriate limit, which for police authorities is set at £450 or 18 staff hours. This represents the estimated cost of one person spending 2.5 working days in determining whether the department holds the information, and locating, retrieving and extracting it.
This letter represents partial Refusal Notice under the Act in relation to question to 3b) and those questions where a monthly breakdown has not been possible without a manual review, as explained above.
The detail collected to respond specifically to your request is subject to the inaccuracies inherent in any large scale recording system. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when interpreting this data.