FOI 0260-2024/25 - Dangerous Dogs

Request

Q1. How many suspected Section 1 dogs (per type) did your force seize under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991?

1. For each S1 dog seized the average length of time between seizure and court hearing.
2. For each S1 dog seized the cost per day per dog for kennelling.

Q2. The number of dogs seized as suspected prohibited types, deemed by the courts as being of each of the different banned types:

1. Pit Bull Terrier
2. Dogo Argentino
3. Japanese Tosa
4. Fila Brasileiro

Q3. How many Section 3 offences were taken to court?

1. Of these how many were Section 3 offences including a dog of a type proscribed under Section 1 of the DDA?
2. For each dog involved in an Section 3 offence, what was their breed or type?

Q4.How many dogs were seized for S1 offences and euthanised?

1. How many of those were each of the four banned types?:
2. Pit Bull Terrier
3. Dogo Argentino
4. Japanese Tosa
5. Fila Brasileiro

Response

Extent and Result of Searches to Locate Information

To locate the information relevant to your request searches were conducted within North Yorkshire Police. I can confirm that the information you have requested is held by North Yorkshire Police.

Decision

I have today decided to disclose the located information to you.

Q1. 2

Q1a. 1+ year

Q1b.  Approximately £900 for all associated fees per calendar month which includes 1 vet visit per month.

Q2a -d. Zero

Q3. 5 resulted in a charged/summonsed outcome

Q3a. None

Q3b. Of those 5 charged/summonsed outcomes for Owner or person in charge allowing dog to be dangerously out of control in a public place injuring any person. The breeds involved are Terrier, Akita and Stafforshire Bull Terrier.

Q4a-d. Zero

I am exempting any further information in relation to this request pursuant to section 30 (Investigations). Please see the explanation below.

Explanation of exemptions

Section 17 of the Act requires North Yorkshire Police, when refusing to provide such information (because the information is exempt) to provide you the applicant with a notice which: (a) states that fact, (b) specifies the exemption in question and (c) states (if that would not otherwise be apparent) why the exemption applies. Please see the exemption explanations below.

Section 30 is a qualified, class-based exemption, which requires that I conduct a public interest test to balance the legitimate interests of the public in knowing the information against the interests of non-disclosure.

Public Interest Test S30

Reasons for Disclosure

Better awareness may reduce crime

The public have an interest in understanding how the police investigate crime.

There is legitimate public interest in knowing how public funds are spent.

Reasons against Disclosure

Law enforcement tactics would be compromised.

The force’s future law enforcement capabilities would be affected.

Disclosure could hinder the prevention and detection and crime, as any offenders could potentially take measure to avoid detection.

The right to a fair trial would be undermined.

Balancing Test

Whilst there is public interest in disclosing any information around such profile subjects, there is also substantial public interest in the Force being able to carry out fair, competent and confidential investigations at all times. 

After considering the reasons for and against disclosure, it is my opinion that the reasons for non-disclosure outweigh the reasons for disclosure.

Pursuant to Section 17(1) of the Act this letter acts as a refusal notice under the Freedom of

Please note that systems used for recording information are not generic, nor are the procedures used locally in capturing the data.  It should be noted therefore that this force’s response to your questions should not be used for comparison purposes with any other responses you may receive.