As always, he starts by explaining not to support the breed ban, as the Danish Kennel Club would much rather have "all dogs that resemble "fighting" dogs, to be kept on leash and muzzled at all times". How is that for an introducing stigmatizing statement? What does "resemble fighting dogs" actually mean? But lets have a look what Jørgen Hindse more has to say about what he calls not supporting the breed ban.
In his evaluation of the breed ban's first year Jørgen Hindse concludes: "based on the cases we have seen in the media it is likely we have fewer dog bite incidents than last year, and something must have happened in this respect". The chairman of the Danish Kennel Club is apparently not informed about the research of Fair Dog, indicating dog bite incidents actually have increased with 26%. Jørgen Hindse seems to suffer of something we see all too often, a general need to voice opinions, solely based on media coverage.
The chairman of the Danish Kennel Club is even going further, as he highlights one of last year's fatal dog bite incidents as an example and concludes, "this would not have happened when the owner had muzzled his 'forbidden' dog". Even today it is actually not clear what breed(s) the individual dog belonged to. Other fatal incidents where breeds were involved that were not included of the ban are overlooked by Jørgen Hindse, and he conveniently uses this single fatal incident with a suspicion of a banned breed's involvement to state: "all owners with dogs that look like one of the banned breeds and were born before the law was implemented must prove what (mix of) breed their dog belongs to." As the law was intended, underlines Jørgen Hindse.
The main problem, according to Jørgen Hindse, is that the law is not properly enforced and calls for politicians "to make public officials follow up and implement the law as intended. This will ensure we will get an effective law, achieve what it is set out to do, and can form a basis for the evaluation of the law in 2013". The evaluation Jørgen Hindse is referring to is the actual decision if the breed ban should include 12 additional breeds, NOT a re-evaluation of the actual breed specific legislation.
Does this sound like a person and an organization that is not supporting the breed ban to you? Their official standpoint in this regard is a hollow phrase. A national Kennel Club should be at the center of the fight for the rights of dogs of all breeds. Lead by people that passionately want to improve the way we breed with dogs, care for them, and live together.
My suggestion to Jørgen Hindse is to take a look just across the border to the north, and see what the Norwegian Kennel Club is doing in their country to stop the breed ban. Their chairman, Espen Engh, is at the center of the protest. Together with other organizations the Norwegian Kennel Club has moved politicians to re-evaluate the breed ban. Espen Engh is of the opinion the Norwegian breed ban stigmatizes completely well-functioning dogs and owners. And even more important, Espen Engh thinks society must invest in the dog owner's competence to deal with their dogs, its socialization and upbringing - and sees it as an important responsibility of the Norwegian Kennel Club to achieve this.
Welcome to the Breed ban "Wall of Shame", Jørgen Hindse and the Danish Kennel Club.
- "Facts" is not a store you can shop in
- The face of a breed ban: make your voice heard
- Dog bite incidents increase: BSL has no effect
- Open letter about BSL was answered ... was it?
- Danish breed ban rests on historically thin basis
- A week of discussing breed bans without facts
- Open letter to Merete Eldrup
- How BSL can bring a whole country into madness
- BSL up close and personal