Breed list

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The American Pit Bull Terrier is considered dangerous by law in many German states, and imports into Germany are prohibited.
Also in the list of dangerous dogs in many German federal states: the bull terrier
The Staffordshire Bull Terrier is not allowed to be imported into Germany

In the context of dog ownership, a breed list is a list of dog breeds that are considered to be dangerous due to their breed or which are suspected of being dangerous (" attack dogs ", dangerous dogs ). Dogs recorded by the breed lists are called list dogs ; Various restrictions apply to their keeping , which may differ depending on the local conditions. The term `` investment dog '' is also widespread and can be traced back to the fact that some breed lists were published in the appendices to the relevant laws or regulations.

In addition to a ban on keeping certain breeds, breed-specific restrictions on keeping are possible. In relation to the owner , this can mean, for example, being of legal age , submission of a certificate of good conduct or the obligation to pass a competence test (" dog handler license "). When keeping other special arrangements as may leash , wear a muzzle , chip duty , compulsory insurance , permit requirements, requirement of sterilization , mandatory for safe enclosure where the dog is kept possession, or dropping a character tests for dogs be prescribed.

history

Germany

The fighting dog discussion, which has flared up again and again to this day, was sparked when a child was killed in an attack by two dogs belonging to a holder with multiple criminal records on June 26, 2000 in Hamburg-Wilhelmsburg . A very controversial and emotional debate about the topic was then held in the media. In a very short time, all federal states issued different dog regulations. What they had in common was that by restricting the keeping of certain dog breeds, they were supposed to increase the safety of the population from attacks by dogs.

Have been designated as dangerous dogs as a rule the races Staffordshire Bull Terrier , American Staffordshire Terrier , American Pit Bull Terrier and Bull Terrier , also other breeds were often listed in a second list, as Tosa Inu , Bullmastiff , Dogo Argentino , Bordeaux mastiff , Fila Brasileiro , Mastín Español , Mastino Napoletano , Mastiff and others. Sometimes fantasy breeds such as bandog or Roman fighting dog were also named. The following conditions were usually made to owners of these dogs:

  • Proof of the reliability of the owner ( police clearance certificate ),
  • Proof of the owner's qualification ( certificate of competence (dogs) ),
  • Forced to wear a muzzle and leash for the dogs in public (exemption possible after character test)
  • Character test for dogs
  • Access ban z. B. at public festivals, in outdoor swimming pools, on playgrounds (not every federal state)
  • Sterilization or castration of dogs (not every federal state)
  • Identification by tattoo or microchip.
  • In Hesse as well as in Thuringia: Identification of all entrances to a fenced property or apartment with a clearly visible warning sign in signal color (Hesse) with the inscription "Caution dog!"

An exception was Thuringia , which on the one hand defined dogs that were bred, trained or trained for aggressiveness or beyond the natural level of willingness to fight or sharpness or for other characteristics with the same effect, as well as generally defined as dangerous dogs those dogs that differ through their behavior have proven dangerous.

The character tests are not standardized. In some federal states, passing the character test led to the exemption from the muzzle requirement, in others not. Many municipalities increased the dog tax for listed dogs drastically, in some cases to ten to twenty times the rate. The animal shelters were filled with hundreds of hard-to-place animals.

The ordinances resulted in a plethora of lawsuits from affected dog owners and breeders, which led to success in the higher administrative courts, for example in Schleswig-Holstein , Lower Saxony and Saxony-Anhalt . The dog ordinances were partially or wholly declared null and void, mainly on the grounds that such deep encroachments on the rights of citizens were not permissible by ordinance . Some federal states then passed laws, others waived, citing the general hazard prevention ordinance, which was in effect anyway .

On April 12, 2001, the German Bundestag passed a " Law to Combat Dangerous Dogs ", on the one hand the import and on the other hand the breeding of dogs of the breeds American Pit Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier, Staffordshire Bull Terrier Bull terriers and their crossbreeds were forbidden.

On March 16, 2004, the Federal Constitutional Court ruled on a constitutional complaint directed against this law. It declared the import ban to be compatible with the Basic Law. On the other hand, the regulation on the prohibition of breeding violates the Basic Law, because it is not a matter of animal welfare law, but of a regulation serving to avert danger, for which the legislative competence lies not with the federal government, but with the states. Article 1 of the Act remains in force as a law restricting the domestic movement or importation of dangerous dogs .

Switzerland

After a young boy was killed by three pit bull terriers on December 1, 2005 in Oberglatt in the canton of Zurich , the federal and most cantons' legislatures took up efforts to introduce stricter owner and ownership rules. The Blick , a tabloid, started a petition for a ban on fighting dogs, which was signed by over 185,000 Swiss. The Federal Council responded with its own proposal, which, however, did not find a majority in the Federal Parliament, which is why the previous cantonal jurisdiction remained unaffected.

In the canton of Valais , the acquisition and keeping of twelve dangerous dog breeds and their crossbreeds has been prohibited since January 1, 2006 (Pit Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier, Staffordshire Bull Terrier, Bull Terrier, Doberman, Argentine Mastiff, Fila Brasileiro, Rottweiler , Mastiff, Spanish Mastiff, Neapolitan Mastiff and Tosa). Transitional arrangements have been made for dogs that have already been kept.

In the canton of Zurich , due to the referendum of November 30, 2008, keeping fighting dogs was banned. American Staffordshire Terriers, Bull Terriers, Staffordshire Bull Terriers and American Pit Bulls fall under this ban.

Raclists in Germany

Federal race list

The Dog Movement and Import Restrictions Act contains a breed list of Pit Bull Terriers , American Staffordshire Terriers , Staffordshire Bull Terriers , and Bull Terriers and includes crosses with these breeds. It is forbidden to bring such dogs to Germany. In addition, dogs of breeds that are suspected to be dangerous in the target federal state may not be imported into this country. Exceptions apply to service dogs , guide dogs , handicapped support dogs and rescue dogs , for short stays (up to 4 weeks) and if there is evidence of authorized behavior in the respective country.

Raclists of the German federal states

Many German federal states keep a breed list of dog breeds that are listed as dangerous or suspected of being dangerous due to their breed . For such "list dogs" then certain regulations apply, for which two different categories apply in some federal states. There are currently graded rattle lists (1 and 2) in five federal states; in other federal states there is a breed list without gradations. Lower Saxony has decided against raclists. Until June 16, 2011, Thuringia took the view that the dangerousness of a dog could not be linked to its breed, then decided on a breed list, which was then abolished in 2018.

In most federal states a dog can be exempted from the measures that are prescribed for listed dogs after passing a character test , in some states this does not apply to all breeds.

The responsible authorities were able to take measures beforehand against an individually dangerous dog. The dog ordinances in force before July 2000 provided the legal basis for taking away aggressive dogs or making other arrangements. It is therefore possible to impose a leash and muzzle obligation on aggressive and dangerous dogs, regardless of race lists. Critics of the breed lists take the position that by eliminating time-consuming and personnel-intensive - and from their point of view nonsensical - measures against listed dogs, the authorities would find more time to implement necessary measures against aggressive dogs more consistently. On the other hand, checking the individual cases is more labor-intensive and time-consuming than checking general directives .

The federal states, with the exception of Lower Saxony, Schleswig-Holstein and Thuringia, define various dog breeds and their mixed breeds as dangerous in their dog laws or dog regulations or refer to the list in the federal regulation of the Dog Movement and Import Restriction Act. The term attack dog is used in the federal states of Bavaria and Baden-Württemberg .

The following table shows which dog breeds are considered dangerous in which federal states in Germany.

Racelists in Germany, status different *)
BW BY BE BB HB HH HE MV NI NW RP SL SN ST SH TH
Alano ? 2 2 2
American Bulldog 2 X 2
(American) Pit Bull Terrier 2 1 X 1 X 1 X X 1 X X X X
American Staffordshire Terrier 2 1 X 1 X 1 X X 1 X X X X
Bandog 1
Bullmastiff 2 2 2 2 2
Bull terrier 2 2 X 1 X 1 X X 1 X X
Cane Corso / Cane Corso Italiano 2 2
Doberman Pinscher 2
Dogo Argentino 2 2 2 2 X 2
Dogue de Bordeaux 2 2 2 2
Fila Brasileiro 2 2 2 2 X 2
Kangal Shepherd Dog 2 X
Caucasian Ovcharka 2 X
Mastiff 2 2 2 2 2
Mastín Español 2 2 2 2 2
Mastino Napoletano 2 2 2 2 2
Perro de Presa Canario ? /
Perro de Presa Canario ( Dogo Canario ) 		 
2		 2
 
Perro de Presa Mallorquin ? 2 2
rottweiler 2 2 2 X 2
Staffordshire Bull Terrier 2 1 1 X 1 X X 1 X X X
Tosa Inu 2 1 1 2 2
BW BY BE BB HB HH HE MV NI NW RP SL SN ST SH TH

Legend: green: breed is not mentioned in the law / regulation, red : breed is included in a list. Country code BW: Baden-Württemberg, BY: Bavaria, BE: Berlin, BB: Brandenburg, HB: Bremen, HE: Hessen, HH: Hamburg, MV: Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, NI: Lower Saxony, NW: North Rhine-Westphalia, RP: Rhineland -Pfalz, SL: Saarland, SN: Saxony, ST: Saxony-Anhalt, SH: Schleswig-Holstein, TH: Thuringia

Explanations
  • ? : In the case of the non-linked names of races, the name cannot be clearly assigned to any race.
  • 1 : The breed is listed as dangerous.
  • 2 : The danger of the breed is presumed, but can be refuted (character test ).
  • X : The breed is listed as dangerous, this federal state does not differentiate between category 1 and category 2. The aforementioned categories are defined differently in the federal states.

*) Status of the respective processing:

  • Baden-Württemberg: The police ordinance of the Ministry of the Interior and the Ministry of Rural Areas on keeping dangerous dogs from August 3, 2000 is taken into account.
  • Bavaria: The regulation on dogs with increased aggressiveness and dangerousness of July 10, 1992 is taken into account, "Status: last change taken into account: Section 1, Paragraph 2 partly unconstitutional (Bek. BayVerfGH of July 15, 2004 Vf. 1-VII-03 , P. 351) "(current and last accessed on February 12, 2012)
  • Berlin: Dangerous Dogs Ordinance of August 22, 2016
  • Brandenburg: The regulatory authority ordinance on keeping and leading dogs (Hundehalterverordnung - HundehV) of June 16, 2004, as it was current on February 12, 2012, is taken into account .
  • Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania: Dog Owner Ordinance of July 4, 2000 (last accessed on May 31, 2018)
  • Lower Saxony: The latest version of the Lower Saxony Law on Keeping Dogs from May 26, 2011 has been taken into account .
  • Thuringia: The first law amending the Thuringian law for the protection of the population from animal hazards of February 12, 2018 has been taken into account
  • Schleswig-Holstein: "Law on Keeping Dogs" (HundG), January 1, 2016. Rattle lists have been abolished.

Individual federal states, peculiarities

Baden-Württemberg

Baden-Württemberg already had a breed list through the Baden-Württemberg Police Ordinance on Keeping Dangerous Dogs of August 28, 1991, which defined attack dogs based on their breed. The Administrative Court of Baden-Württemberg ruled in 1992 that the selection of the dog breeds to be considered fighting dogs violated equality before the law (Art 3 (1) GG) because comparable dogs of other breeds were not taken into account.

The Police Ordinance of the Ministry of the Interior and the Ministry of Rural Areas and Consumer Protection on the keeping of dangerous dogs of August 3, 2000 defines in § 1 attack dogs as "dogs that have increased due to breed-specific characteristics, through breeding or in individual cases because of their keeping or training Aggression and dangerousness towards humans or animals is to be assumed. ”She writes down two rattle lists. One with the breeds American Staffordshire Terrier, Bull Terrier and Pit Bull Terrier, which are suspected to be fighting dogs until proven otherwise. A second list contains nine breeds that can be considered to be fighting dogs if there are any indications. Both lists refer to dogs of the breeds mentioned as well as their crosses with each other or with other dogs. In addition to the fighting dogs defined by breed lists, Section 2 contains stipulations on dangerous dogs that are not fighting dogs. The keeping of fighting dogs requires a permit. In addition, with a few exceptions, they are required to wear a muzzle and a leash .

Bavaria

The Free State of Bavaria has had breed-specific dog regulations since 1992. It contains breed lists for attack dogs , which are "dogs which, due to breed-specific characteristics, breeding or training, can be assumed to be more aggressive and dangerous towards humans or animals". Dog breeds are listed there in:

  • Category 1: The quality of a fighting dog is always assumed.
  • Category 2: The property as a fighting dog is presumed, as long as a corresponding negative proof is not made for the individual dog.

The keeping of fighting dogs - with the exception of service dogs - requires permission, which may only be granted if, among other things, a legitimate interest in keeping them can be proven.

Bavaria is the country with the longest breed list. Most recently, on September 4, 2002, the breeds Alano, American Bulldog, Cane Corso, Perro de Presa Canario (Dogo Canario), Perro de Presa Mallorquin and Rottweiler were added to the list of Category 2. 18 of the names now listed are dog breeds and one type of dog. The nineteenth entry " Bandog " is neither an FCI recognized dog breed nor a generally known type of dog. The Bavarian police describe the bandog “as a large version of the pit bull [...] The bandog, literally translated as 'chain dog', is not a uniform breed. This term describes dogs that are chained up during the day and run free at night to protect property. "The City of Munich describes this type as" crossbreeds of large-framed dogs (shoulder height over 45 cm, weight over 30 kg) with high aggressiveness [...]. There is no uniform external appearance, the colors vary. "

Critics see the principle of certainty violated because the description is not precise enough. The information on chaining and aggressiveness is not about breed-specific characteristics, but about keeping conditions, poor upbringing and possibly animal-welfare-unfriendly breeding selection for aggressiveness.

Berlin

The Dangerous Dog Ordinance of August 22, 2016 lists pit bull terriers, American Staffordshire terriers, bull terriers and crosses of these with each other or with other dogs as dangerous. The Staffordshire Bull Terrier and Dogue de Bordeaux breeds previously listed in the Berlin Dog Ordinance were no longer listed in the law on keeping dogs in Berlin, which came into force on October 10, 2004. It had defined 10 breeds as dangerous: Pit-Bull, American Staffordshire Terrier, Bull Terrier, Tosa Inu, Bullmastiff, Dogo Argentino, Fila Brasileiro, Mastin Espanol, Mastino Napoletano, Mastiff.

Brandenburg

Brandenburg first introduced raclists in 2000. There are two rattle lists in Brandenburg:

  • Dog breeds and groups that are considered dangerous
  • Races and groups for which a presumption of danger applies which can be refuted by a negative certificate.

Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania

On January 1, 2006, the breed list in the state of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania was reduced by seven breeds. The coated breeds Dogo Argentino , Dogue de Bordeaux , Fila Brasileiro , Mastiff , Spanish Mastiff , Neapolitan Mastiff and Tosa Inu .

The state justifies the change with the requirement to review the breed list, which is contained in the decision of the Federal Constitutional Court of March 16, 2004. The judgment states that the legislature has to observe the further development and must check whether the assumptions on which the judgment is based (about race-related dangerousness) are actually confirmed.

Lower Saxony

In the summer of 2000, the Lower Saxony Dangerous Animal Ordinance with a breed list was jointly adopted by all parliamentary groups. On July 3, 2002, the Federal Administrative Court decided to annul the entire dog regulation in the ordinance. The Federal Administrative Court justified the decision by stating that there was a suspicion that certain breeds of dogs might pose an increased risk. However, it is controversial in science what significance this factor, along with numerous other causes - upbringing and training of the dog, expertise and suitability of the owner as well as situational influences - has for triggering aggressive behavior. A mere suspicion of danger, also referred to as a potential for concern, does not justify any intervention on the basis of the general police authorization. Rather, interventions for the purpose of hazard prevention in accordance with the rule of law should be provided for in a special law. Such a law does not exist in Lower Saxony.

Shortly afterwards, the ruling SPD submitted the submission for the Lower Saxony Dog Law, which in turn contained a breed list. The required hearings were held in the state parliament on this legislative proposal. 20 experts and specialist institutions were heard, of which 19 spoke out against racelists; the German Child Protection Association was the only institution in favor of it. The SPD's Animal Welfare Working Group was also against the race list and voted against the SPD minister. The law with a race list was passed by the state parliament with a majority of one vote.

The breed lists were deleted from the dog law after the state elections on February 2, 2003 and the change of government to the CDU . The law was revised again in 2011. This new version does not contain a breed list either. The reason for this says: “In this context, it must be taken into account that, according to the available findings, the behavior of the dog owner has a decisive influence on the type, frequency and severity of an incident involving dogs. The upbringing and training of a dog, the expertise and suitability of the owner as well as situational influences are essential for triggering aggressive behavior. On the other hand, the classification of a dog as being more aggressive or dangerous, linked to belonging to a certain breed or type of dog, is still controversial in specialist circles. "

North Rhine-Westphalia

The state dog law of 2002 provided for an observation and inspection obligation in § 22. For this purpose, statistics are kept in the state of North Rhine-Westphalia, which should be used at a later point in time to decide on the future of the breed list. The data collected relate to biting incidents with injured people in North Rhine-Westphalia and show the percentage of dog breeds according to their population size. Section 22 was repealed in 2016. The reason for this was that "the evaluation obligation of the law provided for in this provision has been fulfilled after five years through a report of the state government of November 19, 2008 to the state parliament (submission 14/2232)." Due to the obligation of the legislature by the Federal Constitutional Court the statistics will continue to be kept.

Saxony-Anhalt

On December 11, 2008, after several years of deliberation, the state parliament of Saxony-Anhalt passed a law on precautionary measures against the dangers posed by dogs . In addition to many race-neutral regulations (chip compulsory, insurance and registration compulsory), a breed list was introduced on March 1, 2009 with reference to the federal law. Section 2 (2) determines

"For dogs that are not allowed to be imported or brought into the Federal Republic of Germany in accordance with Section 2, Paragraph 1, Clause 1 of the Dog Movement and Import Restriction Act [...], the danger is assumed."

These dogs must be subjected to a character test and are no longer subject to any special regulations after passing it. These dogs may not be kept without proof of a passed character test. Character tests from other countries and states can be recognized as equivalent.

Further requirements for a husbandry permit are the age of majority, reliability, personal suitability and expertise of the keeper. The dog (like all other dogs born after March 1st, 2009) must be permanently identified; its owner must take out liability insurance. There is no castration obligation and no breeding ban.

Schleswig-Holstein

On January 1, 2016, the law on the prevention and defense of the dangers posed by dogs (GefHG) was replaced by the law on keeping dogs (DogsG) . Raclists were abolished.

Thuringia

In February 2018, the first law to amend the Thuringian law for the protection of the population from animal dangers came into force, with which the breed list is abolished.

Thuringia introduced a breed list in 2011. It was in paragraph 3 (2) in the Thuringian law for the protection of the population from animal dangers . Dated June 22, 2011 , it defines dangerous dogs. In paragraph 11, the dogs of these breeds are referred to as "dogs whose dangerousness is irrefutably suspected due to genetic predisposition". In addition to the breeds listed, all crosses with them are defined as dangerous, with dogs that have a corresponding phenotype are considered crosses. In case of doubt, the burden of proof lies with the dog owner. To keep a dog that is classified as dangerous, you need a permit, which is tied to a certificate of competence, the reliability of the owner, an electronic tag and liability insurance, among other things . Furthermore, the owner must prove that there is a special scientific or professional need for keeping the animal that cannot be adequately met by dogs of other breeds. There is a breeding and trade ban for dangerous dogs. Dogs of the breeds listed in the law must be made sterile, unless a special permit is obtained.

The law stipulated that, in addition to the breeds listed in the law, dogs of other breeds and their crossbreeds could be determined as dangerous by ordinance. "Only those dog breeds and their crossbreeds may be determined as dangerous if there is a presumption that their danger to the life and health of humans and animals is due to breed-specific characteristics such as biting force, tearing biting behavior and fighting instinct." Such a dog can be refuted in individual cases by a character test in which the dog's ability to behave in a socially acceptable manner is proven. The Ministry of the Interior stated that a listing of further breeds was "not intended for the time being".

The law regulates the conditions for keeping and leading dangerous dogs.

Advocates

The interior ministers of the countries with breed lists take the position that listing dog breeds would make dangerous dogs easier to control and increase the safety of the population from dog attacks. Racelists are also endorsed by the German Child Protection Association and the German Children's Aid Association .

criticism

The breed lists are rejected by several institutions and are not considered to be useful, the most important of which are: Federal Veterinary Association , Federal Association of Practicing Veterinarians , German Animal Welfare Association and Association for German Dogs .

Some of the breed lists were issued on the grounds that the number of dog attacks and the number of people killed had risen sharply in recent years. Media coverage often makes similar claims. Dog bites with a fatal outcome are statistically recorded in Germany, more details in the corresponding article .

Judgment of the Federal Constitutional Court

On the occasion of the review of the Dog Movement and Import Restriction Act , the Federal Constitutional Court in its judgment of March 16, 2004 also dealt with the question of the constitutionality of breed lists. It basically affirmed their admissibility, but at the same time stated that if there is no confirmation of the assumption of excessive frequency of biting by list dogs, a change must be made.

“However, the federal legislature must monitor further developments. The scientific knowledge about the causes of aggressive behavior of dogs of different breeds and about the interaction of different causes as well as the actual assumptions of the legislator still leave considerable uncertainty. It is therefore necessary to keep an eye on the risk situation that can arise from keeping dogs and the causes thereof and, in particular, to check the biting behavior of the dogs covered by Section 2 Paragraph 1 Clause 1 HundVerbrEinfG more than before to rate. If the prognostic assessment of the dangerousness of these dogs is not or not fully confirmed by the legislator, he will have to adapt his regulation to the new knowledge. "

The legislator is free to include those dog breeds in the list that have a comparable frequency of biting as the breeds listed so far or to abolish the breed list altogether and to use criteria other than breed affiliation (e.g. character test or owner qualification).

Racelists in Austria

Red: breed list, green: conditions only for abnormalities, yellow: conditions for all dog breeds.

Three of the nine federal states have a breed list. The red markings in the list show which dog breeds and types of dogs are considered dangerous in these federal states. The regulations also apply to mixed breeds with these breeds and dog types.

Current rattle lists in Austria , as of January 2019
Lower Austria Vorarlberg Vienna
American Pit Bull Terrier
American Staffordshire Terrier
Argentine Mastiff ?
Bandog ?
Bullmastiff
Bull terrier
Dogo Argentino
Dogue de Bordeaux
Fila Brasileiro
Mastiff
Mastín Español
Mastino Napoletano
Ridgeback ?
rottweiler
Staffordshire Bull Terrier
Tosa Inu
Lower Austria Vorarlberg Vienna
Explanations
  • ? : The name cannot be clearly assigned to any race.

Countries with requirements for listed dogs

  • Lower Austria : A stricter dog ownership law applies to listed dogs. In order to be able to keep a listed dog, every owner must provide a legally regulated certificate of competence in addition to an increased dog fee and various additional restrictions. The Constitutional Court dismissed a lawsuit against the Lower Austrian Dog Keeping Act, since “fighting dogs” are typically perceived by other people as having an increased risk potential and therefore special measures are required to give these other people confidence in the safe handling of such dogs, which does not cause unreasonable nuisance in public places. "
  • Vorarlberg Since 1992, the keeping of the listed dogs of the "Vorarlberg Fighting Dog Ordinance" has been subject to a permit requirement. The local mayor is responsible.
  • Vienna : Since 2006 there has been a dog driving license in Vienna on a voluntary basis. For dogs that are referred to as "dogs requiring a handler's license" in Viennese legislation, the handler's license has been mandatory since July 1st, 2011. The Constitutional Court dismissed an action against it.

Countries with requirements for all dogs

  • All federal states municipalities can order a leash and muzzle for individual dogs or areas.
  • Upper Austria Compulsory two-hour course.
  • Styria information meeting in planning.

Raclists in Switzerland

history

Race lists in Switzerland, as of April 2014. Green: No race list; Red: race bans; Red / yellow: breed bans and breeds requiring a license; Yellow: breeds that require a license

On July 1, 2003 , Basel-Landschaft was the first canton to introduce a breed list, in which it required a cantonal permit for keeping listed dogs. In contrast, 23 affected dog owners filed a lawsuit. On November 17, 2005, the Federal Supreme Court dismissed this lawsuit and ruled that the cantons are fundamentally entitled to introduce a license requirement for keeping certain dog breeds.

There was a bite attack in the canton of Zurich in early December 2005 in which pit bull-type dogs killed a child. The tabloid Blick then organized a petition to ban pit bulls and their crossbreeds, which was signed by 175,000 Swiss citizens (around 2% of the population). Because of the Zurich incident which showed Swiss Federal Department of Economic Affairs , the Federal Veterinary Office to prepare rules for statutory provisions on measures against aggressive dogs.

In the draft or the explanations for the new version of the Swiss Animal Welfare Act, the new Article 31b provided for breeding, import, holding and trading bans for dogs of the Pitbull type and their crossbreeds, the breeds prohibited in Valais and the Cane Corso Italiano . This draft law failed in parliament; National Councilor Heiner Studer ( EVP / AG ), who strongly advocated the introduction of a breed list at the federal level, was voted out of office in 2007. A parliamentary initiative by the National Councilor Pierre Kohler ( CVP / JU ), who was also voted out in 2007 , which would have introduced a nationwide breed list, was rejected in December 2010.

As there are therefore no nationwide regulations, the decision on the introduction of a breed list and the selection of the breeds listed is still a matter for the cantons. The canton of Valais was the first canton to introduce a cantonal breed list on January 1, 2006, in which the keeping of certain breeds was prohibited. The Federal Supreme Court then confirmed in spring 2007 that a cantonal ban on certain dog breeds is not unconstitutional. This decision was confirmed at the beginning of 2010 when the Federal Supreme Court rejected a complaint by the breed clubs concerned against the dog bans in the Canton of Zurich and ruled that breed bans do not violate the principle of equality of rights.

Current rattle lists

Of the 26 cantons and half-cantons , 13 have introduced a race list. Cantons without raclists are both Appenzell , Bern , Graubünden , Jura , Lucerne , Neuchâtel , St. Gallen , the original cantons and Zug . In the canton of Aargau a breed list was introduced on May 1, 2012 a referendum against the relevant law had been rejected by 75% of the vote. In the canton of Glarus , the municipality rejected the introduction of race bans on May 6, 2012 and commissioned the executive to draw up a list of breeds requiring a license. This came into force on January 1, 2014.

A total of 38 dog breeds are on the breed list in at least one canton. The canton of Ticino has the longest breed list with 30 breeds; the shortest breed list is that of the canton of Vaud with three breeds. Most breeds are banned by the canton of Geneva , where keeping 15 breeds is prohibited. In addition to Geneva, the cantons of Friborg , Valais and Zurich also have general bans on keeping certain breeds; In all other cantons, all listed dog breeds can be kept with a cantonal permit. Geneva also requires a holding permit for all dogs over 25 kg, which is linked to a character test. In Zurich, additional training courses are required for all dogs over 16 kg and / or 45 cm shoulder height ("breed type I").

Raclists in Switzerland, as of April 2014
AG BL BS FR GE GL SH SO TG TI VD VS ZH
American Bulldog
American pit bull terrier X X X X
American Staffordshire Terrier X X X
Anatolian Shepherd Dog
Bandog X
Beauceron
Belgian shepherd dog
Boerboel X
Bullmastiff X
Bull terrier X X
Bull terrier (miniature) ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
Cane Corso X
German Mastiff
German shepherd dog
Doberman Pinscher X
Dogo Argentino X X
Dogo Canario (Presa Canario) X
Dogue de Bordeaux X
Fila Brasileiro X X
Dutch Shepherd Dog
Hovawart
Caucasian Ovcharka
Komondor
Kuvasz
Mastiff X X
Mastín Español X X
Mastino Napoletano X X
Rhodesian Ridgeback
rottweiler X X
Sarplaninac
Staffordshire Bull Terrier X X
South Russian Ovcharka
Tatra Shepherd Dog
Thai ridgeback X
Tibetan Mastiff
Tosa Inu X X
Czechoslovakian wolf dog
Central Asian Ovcharka
Crossbreeds from list dogs X X X X
AG BL BS FR GE GL SH SO TG TI VD VS ZH
Explanations
  • Green : No conditions.
  • Red : The breed is considered potentially dangerous, acquisition and keeping are possible with cantonal approval. The exact conditions for the grant vary depending on the canton.
  • X : The breed is considered potentially dangerous. Breeding, acquisition, import and keeping are prohibited. A cantonal permit is required for dogs that were already present when the list was introduced. No new permits will be issued.
  • ? : It is unclear whether the breed is considered potentially dangerous, an explicit statement has not been made.

Breed list in Liechtenstein

In 2008 the Principality of Liechtenstein introduced a breed list with potentially dangerous dogs:

Listed dogs require a permit in Liechtenstein and must be on a leash and muzzled in public from the age of nine months, unless they have completed a character test . This character test is called the “social impact assessment” in Liechtenstein.

Regulations in non-German-speaking countries

There are various rattle lists and legal regulations around the world. In the English-language specialist literature, the term breed-specific legislation has been established for this . Racelists exist in Great Britain and Denmark , among others . The Netherlands canceled their breed list again.

Great Britain

The UK has had a Dangerous Dog Act since 1991 . It prohibits the breeding and ownership of dogs bred to fight, places restrictions on dogs that pose a serious danger to the public, and regulates that dogs be kept under control.

In addition to describing dogs in terms of their respective characteristics (e.g. dogs for fighting), the law also contains breeds for which corresponding characteristics are assumed. Dangerous dogs are described in terms of a certain defined type.

Denmark

In Denmark , the keeping, breeding and importation of the following eleven dog breeds and their mixed breeds is prohibited if they were acquired after March 17, 2010.

The races were already banned beforehand

for which the acquisition period does not apply.

The dog owner must provide appropriate evidence ( reversal of the burden of proof ).

This regulation also applies to tourists staying in Denmark; transit without a tourist stop is permitted as long as the dog does not leave the car (except for cleaning).

France

As a unitary state, France has a breed list that is valid throughout the country and divides listed dogs into two categories.

Category 1 dogs

Category 1 dogs are called "attack dogs" ( chiens d'attaque ). By definition, they are not breeds recognized by the FCI or the SCC , but rather undocumented dogs of the Pitbull and Boerboel types and undocumented dogs that are similar to the Tosa .

Category 1 dogs are not allowed to enter France, keeping them is prohibited throughout the country. For dogs already living in France when the breed list was introduced in 2010, transitional provisions apply: The owners need a holding permit; their dogs must be neutered and must be leashed in public and muzzled. Access to public transport, restaurants and other bars and staying in the common area of ​​apartment buildings are prohibited.

Category 2 dogs

Category 2 dogs are referred to as "guard dogs" ( chiens de garde et de défense ). They are pedigree dogs with papers recognized by the FCI or the SCC, which belong to the races American Staffordshire Terrier , Staffordshire Bull Terrier , Rottweiler and Tosa , as well as undocumented dogs, which outwardly resemble the Rottweiler.

Category 2 dogs must be on a leash and muzzled in public; the dog handler must be of legal age.

Italy

In Italy there was a list of the last 135 races classified as dangerous. This was abolished on May 25, 2009, since then the "Ordinanza Martino" of March 3, 2009 has been in force. It states that the previous regulation has not reduced the number of incidents with aggressive dogs and that the scientific literature shows that due to Racial affiliation makes it impossible to predict the occurrence of aggressive behavior. A new register is being introduced of individual dogs that have attracted attention due to their aggressive behavior and whose ownership is subject to strict restrictions.

criticism

In many countries, the regulations were passed after individual accidents involving so-called fighting dogs . Interest groups of dog owners such as B. the VDH , but also veterinary associations and animal welfare associations criticize the fact that the preparation and adoption took place under pressure from the media and often in a great hurry, without the advice of experts such as e. B. Obtain ethologists and veterinarians. A number of ordinances had to be repealed or revised following judgments by the administrative courts .

As the responsibility for the relevant laws and ordinances lies with the municipalities and federal states (or in Switzerland with the cantons ), there are a number of different regulations. Under certain circumstances, even when crossing the border between two municipalities, this can lead to a dog owner committing an administrative offense out of ignorance if, for example, the municipalities regulate the length of the dog leash or the obligation to leash differently.

Those affected and animal welfare associations also criticize the fact that the majority of the ordinances are aimed exclusively at restrictions on dog owners and not on the welfare of animals in terms of animal welfare . The measures proposed by various animal welfare associations, veterinarians and the VDH , such as proof of competence (dogs) or dog driving license, are not required in most legal regulations.

The advocates of the dog ordinance say: “The primary goal of the dog ordinance is and remains the protection of the life and health of humans and animals from dangerous dogs” (Senator Roth from Hamburg). In these breeds, an increased willingness to aggression as well as special physical and biting strength is assumed.

The protection of life and health is to be achieved in the short term through the listed conditions and restrictions on dog ownership , in the long term also by the fact that the breeds designated as fighting dogs in the narrower sense are subject to the nationwide import ban in the territory of the Federal Republic (or through uniform legislation across Europe ) should disappear.

Opponents of the breed lists, including the Federal Veterinary Association, argue that there are no aggressive dog breeds per se, but that the danger of a dog can only be assessed in individual cases. In this respect, the population is "fooled" by the racial lists and it is a "general discipline of dogs" and their owners. Rather, it makes sense to demand a certificate of competence from every dog ​​owner, since dangerous dogs are not born, but raised by their owners. Liability insurance and identification of all dogs by microchip are also required.

The cynologists Erik Zimen , Dorit Feddersen-Petersen and Günther Bloch take a similar point of view . Reports by the University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover , the Institute for Pet Studies at the Christian-Albrechts-University in Kiel and the University of Veterinary Medicine in Vienna also come to similar conclusions.

Scientific knowledge on the question of breed-specific danger

In various scientific papers no indications could be found that the breed of a dog allows a prediction of its dangerousness. Ádám Miklósi , who leads the largest research group on dog behavior in Europe, notes that while various demographic surveys on the epidemiology of dog bites have been published, differences in methodology make comparison difficult and concludes that “in general there are none 'Dangerous' breeds exist. ”Instead, there are clear connections between increased aggressiveness and a lack of expertise on the part of the dog owner, incorrect assessment of dog behavior by the owner and aversive training methods.

A study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , which evaluated fatal bite injuries caused by dogs in the United States between 1979 and 1998, concluded that both pit bulls and rottweilers together caused more than half of all dog bite deaths.

Effects of Racelists

A study in the Canadian province of Manitoba , which compares cities with and without a breed list as well as cities before and after the introduction of a breed list, comes to the conclusion that the number of hospitalizations due to dog bites in jurisdictions with a breed list is significantly lower than in those without and that the introduction of a breed list leads to a significant decrease in such hospitalizations. In the Spanish region of Catalonia , hospitalizations from dog bites have also decreased by 38% after the introduction of a breed list. According to statistics, according to statistics, the number of bite incidents for Berlin has decreased from around 300 per year to 25 (as of December 2013) for Berlin, according to Claudia Engfeld, spokeswoman for the Senator for Justice and Consumer Protection.

Animal welfare aspects

Some laws and regulations stipulate that dangerous dogs and dogs that are suspected of being dangerous are required to be on a leash and muzzle. From an animal welfare point of view, however, the obligation to wear a leash and a muzzle should be rejected, as they do not allow the dog adequate social behavior, especially in contact with other dogs. Keeping a dog without freedom of movement and social contact can in turn lead to behavioral problems. Therefore, under the premise of the priority of avoiding danger over animal welfare, the obligation to wear a leash and muzzle is only justified for dogs that actually pose a danger. In such cases, behavioral training should help the dog to lead an animal-friendly life again.

Legal classification in Germany by the Federal Constitutional Court

In its judgment in the proceedings on the constitutional complaint against the law to combat dangerous dogs of April 12, 2001 [...] the Federal Constitutional Court stated on March 16, 2004: “Special regulations for dealing with dangers related to the presence of dangerous dogs and the Dealing with them has existed in the area of ​​the federal states since the beginning of the 1990s [...] The definition of the term dangerous dog was partly linked to belonging to certain breeds [...]. The constitutional courts of the federal states and the administrative courts have assessed the constitutionality of such regulations differently [...]. The Federal Administrative Court has meanwhile ruled several times that, according to the current state of scientific knowledge, it cannot be concluded that a dog is a certain breed and that it is dangerous. Interferences in the freedom of the owners of corresponding dogs based solely on race affiliation, since they did not serve to avert danger but to prevent danger, could not take place on the basis of general police-law authorizing norms by means of statutory ordinances. What is needed is a decision by the parliamentary legislature in a special law [...] "

See also

Portal: Dog  - Overview of Wikipedia content on the subject of dogs

literature

  • René Schneider: The Saxon law for the protection of the population from dangerous dogs (SächsGefHundG) At the same time an investigation into the problem of fighting dogs in Germany from a public law perspective. Studies on Administrative Law, Vol. 22, Verlag Dr. Kovac, Hamburg 2007, ISBN 978-3-8300-3121-5

Web links

  • Irene Sommerfeld-Stur : Are There Dangerous Races? The author, professor at the Institute for Animal Breeding and Genetics at the University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, expresses herself on the basis of the review of the relevant literature up to 2005 on the question of the dangerousness of dogs because they belong to certain breeds. On: http://sommerfeld-stur.at /, last accessed on March 10, 2014.

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ So also in NRW, see Hans-Hermann Bentrup: Why Ms. Höhn is responsible for the NRW dog regulation . In: Jörn-Erik Gutheil (ed.): The Lord creates justice and justice. Festschrift for Hans Engel . Foedus-Verlag, Wuppertal 2000, ISBN 978-3-932735-49-3 , p. 153.
  2. ↑ Hazard Defense Ordinance on keeping and leading dogs (Dog Ordinance). (Ordinance of the federal state of Hesse of January 22, 2003).
  3. ↑ Thuringian Hazard Dog Ordinance - ThürGefHuVO (pdf)
  4. ↑ BVerfG, judgment of March 16, 2004 , Az. 1 BvR 1778/01, full text.
  5. ↑ Statute of Potentially Dangerous Dogs in the Canton of Valais ( Memento of the original dated December 7, 2015 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.vs.ch archive link was inserted automatically and not yet checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. of December 9, 2005 [15. December 2005]
  6. ↑ Statistical Office of the Canton of Zurich: Official voting results ( memento of the original dated November 9, 2011 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link has been inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.wahlen.zh.ch
  7. ↑ § 2, Paragraph 3, Sentence 1 of the Ordinance on Carrying and Keeping Dogs (Hundehalterverordnung - HundehVO MV) of July 4, 2000, GVOBl. MV 2000, p. 295 .
  8. ↑ First law to amend the Thuringian law to protect the population from animal dangers from February 12, 2018 In: Law and Ordinance Gazette for the Free State of Thuringia. 1/2018
  9. ↑ a b Law on Keeping Dogs (Dogs Act)
  10. ↑ Police Ordinance of the Ministry of Rural Areas on Keeping Dangerous Dogs of August 28, 1991, Journal of Laws of 542
  11. ↑ Administrative Court of Baden-Wuerttemberg, August 18, 1992, Az: 1 S 1 S 2550/91 2550/91
  12. ↑ a b Police Ordinance of the Ministry of the Interior and the Ministry for Rural Areas and Consumer Protection on keeping dangerous dogs of August 3, 2000
  13. ↑ a b Law on State Criminal Law and Ordinance Law in the Field of Public Safety and Order (State Criminal Law and Ordinance Act - LStVG), Art. 37
  14. ↑ Ordinance on dogs with increased aggressiveness and danger from July 10, 1992
  15. ↑ Ordinance amending the Ordinance on Dogs with Increased Aggressiveness and Dangerousness of September 4, 2002 (GVBl p. 513, BayRS 2011-2-7-I)
  16. ^ Document on fighting dogs on the Bavarian Police website (PDF; 823 kB) accessed on April 4, 2010
  17. ↑ District administration department Munich: Dangerous animals - attack dogs - bandog , accessed on April 4, 2010.
  18. ↑ Wolfram Hamann: Gutachten (1997) ( Memento of the original from October 19, 2004 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (PDF; 81 kB) accessed on April 4, 2010 @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.hund-is-hund.de
  19. ↑ Ordinance on the determination of dangerous dogs within the meaning of Section 5, Paragraph 1, Clause 1 of the Dog Act (Hazardous Dogs Ordinance - GefHuVO) of 22 August 2016
  20. ↑ Law on keeping and leading dogs in Berlin of September 29, 2004 (GVBl. P. 424)
  21. ↑ a b c BVerfG, judgment of the First Senate of March 16, 2004 - 1 BvR 1778/01 - Rn. (1-123)
  22. ↑ BVerwG, judgment of July 3, 2002 Az. 6 CN 5.01, full text.
  23. ↑ Debate in the Lower Saxony State Parliament on September 24, 2002 ( Memento of the original from January 5, 2006 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was automatically inserted and not yet checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. . Retrieved December 28, 2005. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / schmidt9.de
  24. ↑ Law on the revision of the Lower Saxony law on keeping dogs and on the amendment of the Lower Saxony Municipal Tax Act of May 26, 2011 (Nds.GVBl. No. 11/2011 p. 130; ber. P. 184) ( online )
  25. ^ Lower Saxony State Parliament - 16th electoral term. Printed matter 16/3277. Draft. Law to revise the Lower Saxony law on keeping dogs and to amend the Lower Saxony municipal tax law. P. 11. ( pdf online )
  26. ↑ Evaluation of the reports on the dogs officially registered in North Rhine-Westphalia in 2006 ( online ; PDF; 57.4 kB)
    • Report on the effects of the Dog Act for the State of North Rhine-Westphalia (Landeshundegesetz - LHundG NRW) of December 18, 2002 (GV.NRW. P. 656) and the ordinance of the regulatory authorities for the implementation of the State Dog Act NRW (DVO LHundG NRW) of December 19 2003 (GV.NRW. 2004 p. 85), amended by the law of 11 December 2007 (GV.NRW. P. 662) ( online ; PDF; 1.6 MB)
    • Evaluation of the reports on the statistics of the dogs officially registered in North Rhine-Westphalia in the years 2008–2009. ( online ; PDF; 63.7 kB)
  27. ↑ Law amending regulations on fixed-term management in the division of the Ministry for Climate Protection, Environment, Agriculture, Nature and Consumer Protection. From September 20, 2016, Article 1.
  28. ↑ a b Amendment of the administrative regulations for the State Dog Act. Circular Decree of the Ministry of the Environment, Agriculture, Nature and Consumer Protection - VI-6 - 1/78/52. 25 July 2017.
  29. ^ Annotated agenda of the state parliament sessions on February 19 and 20, 2009
  30. ↑ Landtag of Saxony-Anhalt printed matter 5/1623 ( Memento of the original from September 20, 2009 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. December 2, 2008, recommendation for a resolution by the Committee on Home Affairs on the draft law on precaution against the dangers posed by dogs @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.landtag.sachsen-anhalt.de
  31. ↑ First law to amend the Thuringian law to protect the population from animal dangers from February 12, 2018 In: Law and Ordinance Gazette for the Free State of Thuringia. 1/2018
  32. ^ Thuringian law for the protection of the population from animal dangers. From June 22, 2011. In: Law and Ordinance Gazette for the Free State of Thuringia. No. 6, 2011 ( online ; PDF; 1.5 MB)
  33. ^ Thuringian law for the protection of the population from animal dangers. From June 22, 2011. § 11 In: Law and Ordinance Gazette for the Free State of Thuringia. No. 6, 2011 ( online ; PDF; 1.5 MB)
  34. ^ Thuringian law for the protection of the population from animal dangers. From June 22nd 2011. § 3 (4) In: Law and Ordinance Gazette for the Free State of Thuringia. No. 6, 2011 ( online ; PDF; 1.5 MB)
  35. ^ Free State of Thuringia. Ministry of the Interior: Website Thuringian Law for the Protection of the Population from Animal Hazards . Frequently asked Questions. Retrieved February 9, 2012
  36. ↑ Kinderschutzbund sees increasing threat from attack dogs on welt.de, accessed on February 8, 2012
  37. ↑ Opinion on “fighting dogs” ( memento of the original from October 3, 2012 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. on the website of Deutsche Kinderhilfe, accessed on February 8, 2012 @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.kinderhilfe.de
  38. ↑ "Rattle lists" remain permissible - and unsuitable  ( page can no longer be called up , search in web archives )  Info: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. - Press release of the German Federal Veterinary Association, accessed on February 8, 2012@1@ 2Template: Dead Link / www.bundestieraerztekammer.de  
  39. ↑ The upper end of the line ( Memento from May 22, 2003 in the Internet Archive ) (PDF; 558 kB)
  40. ↑ So-called fighting dogs ( Memento of the original from December 17, 2012 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. on the website of the German Animal Welfare Association, accessed on February 8, 2012 @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / poll.tierschutzbund.de
  41. ↑ Socially acceptable dogs without breed lists (PDF; 1.1 MB) on the VDH website, accessed on February 8, 2012
  42. ↑ a b c d dog laws throughout Austria
  43. ↑ Information page of the Federal Ministry for Digitization and Business Location of the Republic of Austria: General information on keeping list dogs ("fighting dogs") (accessed on May 8, 2019)
  44. ^ Lower Austrian dog ownership law
  45. ^ Ordinance of the state government on keeping fighting dogs
  46. ^ Ordinance of the Viennese provincial government on the definition of dogs requiring a license
  47. ↑ Lower Austrian dog ownership law ( Memento of the original from August 7, 2014 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.ris.bka.gv.at
  48. ↑ Hundehalte-Sachkundeverordnung (pdf) ( Memento of the original dated August 7, 2014 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.ris.bka.gv.at
  49. ↑ Lower Austrian Dog Tax Act (pdf; 12 kB)
  50. ↑ knowledge G24 / 11 the Constitutional Court of 6 October 2011, available on the Legal Information System of the Republic of Austria (RIS).
  51. ↑ listed dogs and situation in Vorarlberg (pdf) ( Memento of the original from August 7, 2014 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.ris.bka.gv.at
  52. ↑ Vienna - voluntary dog ​​driving license ( memento of the original from September 9, 2013 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.wien.gv.at
  53. ↑ Vienna Animal Keeping Act  ( page no longer available , search in web archives )  Info: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.@1@ 2Template: Toter Link / www.ris.bka.gv.at  
  54. ↑ Vienna - compulsory dog ​​driving license ( memento of the original dated February 2, 2012 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.wien.gv.at
  55. ↑ Vienna: Dog license for "Kamphunde" ( Memento of the original from November 13, 2011 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.wien-konkret.at
  56. ↑ a b Ordinance on keeping potentially dangerous dogs on the website of the Canton of Basel-Landschaft, accessed on February 8, 2012
  57. ↑ BGE 132 I 7 on the breed list in BL, accessed on February 8, 2012
  58. ↑ Blick.ch: BLICK petition presented!
  59. ↑ Page no longer available , search in web archives: Federal Veterinary Office: Measures against aggressive dogs . Retrieved February 9, 2006@1@ 2Template: Dead Link / www.blv.admin.ch
  60. ↑ Page no longer available , search in web archives: Draft of the new version of the Swiss Animal Welfare Act (pdf) . Retrieved February 9, 2006@1@ 2Template: Dead Link / www.blv.admin.ch
  61. ↑ Page no longer available , search in web archives: Explanations on the new version of the Swiss Animal Welfare Act of January 12, 2006 (pdf). Retrieved February 9, 2006@1@ 2Template: Dead Link / www.blv.admin.ch
  62. ↑ Motion Studer on the “Fighting dog ban” on parlament.ch, accessed on February 9, 2012
  63. ^ Kohler's parliamentary initiative "Ban on Pitbulls" on parlament.ch, accessed on February 9, 2012
  64. ↑ Media release of the Canton of Valais on the decision of the Federal Supreme Court (French) ( Memento of the original of December 17, 2012 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link has been inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.vs.ch
  65. ↑ BGE 133 I 249 on the Wallisser breed ban, accessed on February 7, 2012
  66. ↑ BGE 136 I 1 on the Zurich breed ban, accessed on February 8, 2012
  67. ↑ Innerrhodner Hundegesetz ( Memento of the original from April 18, 2014 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link has been inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (PDF; 25 kB) on the website of the Kt. AI, accessed on February 12, 2012 @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.ai.ch
  68. ↑ Veterinary Office of both Appenzell ( Memento of the original from February 13, 2011 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. , accessed November 15, 2011 @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.ar.ch
  69. ↑ Office for Veterinary Affairs of the Canton of Bern ( Memento of the original from November 22, 2011 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link has been inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. , accessed November 15, 2011 @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.vol.be.ch
  70. ↑ Graubünden Office for Food Safety and Animal Health ( Memento of the original from March 6, 2012 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. , accessed November 15, 2011 @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.gr.ch
  71. ^ Office des affaires vétérinaires du Canton du Jura ( Memento of the original dated June 12, 2011 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. , accessed November 15, 2011 @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.jura.ch
  72. ↑ Veterinary Service of the Canton of Lucerne ( Memento of the original from July 2, 2012 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. , accessed November 15, 2011 @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.veterinaerdienst.lu.ch
  73. ↑ Office vétérinaire cantonal de Neuchâtel ( Memento of the original of December 31, 2008 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link has been inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. , accessed November 15, 2011 @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.ne.ch
  74. ^ Office for Consumer Protection and Veterinary Affairs of the Canton of St. Gallen , accessed on November 15, 2011
  75. ↑ Laboratory of the Original Cantons , accessed on November 15, 2011
  76. ↑ Veterinary service of the Canton of Zug ( Memento of the original from April 17, 2013 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. , accessed November 15, 2011 @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.zug.ch
  77. ↑ Aargauer Veterinärdienst ( Memento of the original from April 19, 2014 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. , accessed November 12, 2012 @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.ag.ch
  78. ↑ Draft for the new Aargau dog law ( memento of the original from April 19, 2014 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. , accessed November 12, 2012 @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.ag.ch
  79. ↑ Voting results dog law ( memento of the original from September 26, 2013 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. on the website of the Canton of Aargau, accessed on November 12, 2012 @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.ag.ch
  80. ↑ Landsgemeinde overturns the ban on fighting dogs on the NZZ website , accessed on May 8, 2012
  81. ↑ Ordinance on the cantonal animal welfare and epizootic disease law of September 17, 2013 on the website of the Canton of Glarus, accessed on December 28, 2018
  82. ↑ Geneva legislation at the Foundation for Animals in Law , accessed on April 18, 2014
  83. ↑ Zurich legislation at the Foundation for Animals in Law, accessed on April 18, 2014
  84. ↑ Breed list of Canton Aargau , accessed on May 24, 2013
  85. ↑ Race list of the Canton of Basel-Stadt ( Memento of the original from December 20, 2012 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. , accessed May 24, 2013 @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.veterinaeramt-bs.ch
  86. ↑ Dogs forbidden in the canton of Freiburg and dogs requiring a permit in the canton of Freiburg , accessed on May 24, 2013
  87. ↑ Breed list of the Canton of Geneva (PDF; 802 kB), accessed on May 24, 2013
  88. ↑ Ordinance on the cantonal animal welfare and epizootic disease law of September 17, 2013 on the website of the Canton of Glarus, accessed on December 28, 2018
  89. ↑ Breed list of the Canton of Schaffhausen , accessed on May 24, 2013
  90. ↑ Rasselist des Kt. Solothurn ( Memento of the original from December 17th, 2012 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and not yet checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. , accessed May 24, 2013 @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.so.ch
  91. ^ Rasselist des Kt. Thurgau ( Memento of the original from April 19, 2014 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was automatically inserted and not yet checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (PDF; 510 kB), accessed on May 24, 2013 @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.veterinaeramt.tg.ch
  92. ↑ Breed list of the Canton of Ticino (PDF; 579 kB), accessed on May 24, 2013
  93. ↑ Breed list of the Canton of Vaud (PDF; 108 kB), accessed on May 24, 2013
  94. ↑ Rasselist des Kt. Wallis ( Memento of the original from December 17, 2012 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (PDF; 54 kB), accessed on May 24, 2013 @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.vs.ch
  95. ↑ Breed list of the Canton of Zurich  ( page no longer available , search in web archives )  Info: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (PDF; 132 kB), accessed on May 24, 2013@1@ 2Template: Dead Link / www.veta.zh.ch  
  96. ↑ Breed list of the Principality of Liechtenstein ( Memento of the original from November 13, 2011 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (PDF; 394 kB), accessed on November 17, 2011 @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.llv.li
  97. ↑ Social Impact Assessment in Liechtenstein ( Memento of the original dated November 14, 2011 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. , accessed November 17, 2011 @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.llv.li
  98. ↑ Dangerous Dogs Act 1991. Introduction (Engl.)
  99. ↑ Bekendtgørelse af lov om dogs
  100. ↑ Entry regulations Denmark accessed on March 13, 2013 ( Memento of the original from March 29, 2013 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / tyskland.um.dk
  101. ↑ Lov om ændring af lov om hunde og dyreværnsloven (Law amending the Law on Dogs and Animal Welfare) Law No. 717 of 25 June 2010
  102. ↑ Chiens dangereux: description, interdiction et obligations on service-public.fr, accessed on February 8, 2012
  103. ↑ Italian breed list
  104. ↑ Ordinanza (…) concernente la tutela dell'incolumità pubblica dall'aggressione dei cani on the website of the Italian government
  105. ↑ April 6, 2004 Veterinarians regret judgment: "Rasselists" remain permissible - and unsuitable. Press release of the Federal Veterinary Association on the decision of the Federal Constitutional Court of March 16, 2004 ( Memento of March 4, 2016 in the Internet Archive )
  106. ↑ Angela Mittmann: Investigation of the behavior of 5 dog breeds and one dog type in the character test according to the guidelines of the Lower Saxony Hazardous Animal Ordinance of July 5th, 2000 . Dissertation. University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover. Hanover 2002, p. 94 ( online [PDF]).
  107. ↑ Andrea Böttjer: Investigation of the behavior of five dog breeds and one type of dog in intra-species contact of the character test according to the guidelines of the Lower Saxony Dangerous Animal Ordinance of 05.07.2000 . Dissertation. University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover. Hanover 2003, p. 252 ( online (PDF; 3.6 MB)).
  108. ↑ Tina Johann: Investigation of the behavior of Golden Retrievers in comparison to the dogs classified as dangerous in the character test according to the Lower Saxony Hazardous Animal Ordinance of 05.07.2000 . Dissertation. University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover. Hanover 2004, p. 77 ( online (PDF; 890 kB)).
  109. ↑ Christine Baumann: Review of the increased aggressiveness and dangerousness of Rottweilers and Rottweiler half-breeds in the context of the evaluation of character tests in Bavaria . Dissertation. Institute for Animal Welfare, Behavioral Science and Animal Hygiene of the Veterinary Faculty of the Ludwig Maximilians University in Munich. Munich 2005, DNB  975145207 , p. 95 ( online (PDF; 850 kB)).
  110. ↑ Jennifer Hirschfeld: Investigation of a Bull Terrier breed line for hypertrophy of aggressive behavior . Dissertation. Institute for animal welfare and behavior (pets, laboratory animals and horses) of the University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover. German Veterinary Medicine Society Service GmbH, Giessen 2005, ISBN 3-938026-35-9 , p. 181–187 ( online (PDF; 1.4 MB)).
  111. ↑ R. Struwe; F.Kuhne: Dogs that have become conspicuous in Berlin and Brandenburg - their representation in official statistics and in the dog population. Free University of Berlin, Department of Veterinary Medicine, Institute for Animal Welfare and Animal Behavior. ( online ; PDF; 157 kB)
  112. ↑ Stephen Collier: Breed-specific legislation and the pit bull terrier: Are the laws justified ?. In: Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research. 1, 2006, pp. 17-22, doi: 10.1016 / j.jveb.2006.04.011 .
  113. ↑ Ádám Miklósi: Dogs. Evolution, cognition and behavior . Franckh-Kosmos, Stuttgart 2011, ISBN 978-3-440-12462-8 , pp. back cover .
  114. ↑ Ádám Miklósi: Dogs. Evolution, cognition and behavior . Franckh-Kosmos, Stuttgart 2011, ISBN 978-3-440-12462-8 , pp. 106 .
  115. ↑ Esther Schalke et al .: Investigation of a bull terrier breed line with regard to a possible hypertrophy of the aggressive behavior in dog-dog contact of the Lower Saxony character test. In: Kleintierpraxis 56 (2011), pp. 466–472.
  116. ↑ JJ Sacks, L. Sinclair, J. Gilchrist, GC Golab, R. Lockwood: Breeds of dogs involved in fatal human attacks in the United States between 1979 and 1998. In: Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association. Vol. 217, number 6, September 2000, pp. 836-840, ISSN  0003-1488 . PMID 10997153 . Full text
  117. ↑ M. Raghavan, PJ Martens, D. Chateau, C. Burchill: Effectiveness of breed-specific legislation in decreasing the incidence of dog-bite injury hospitalizations in people in the Canadian province of Manitoba. In: Injury Prevention. Vol. 19, number 3, June 2013, pp. 177-183, ISSN  1475-5785 . doi: 10.1136 / injuryprev-2012-040389 . PMID 22753529 . PMC 3664365 (free full text).
  118. ↑ JR Villalbí, M. Cleries, S. Bouis, V. Peracho, J. Duran, C. Casas: Decline in hospitalizations due to dog bite injuries in Catalonia, 1997-2008. An effect of government regulation? In: Injury Prevention. Vol. 16, number 6, December 2010, pp. 408-410, ISSN  1475-5785 . doi: 10.1136 / ip.2010.026997 . PMID 20805621 .
  119. ↑ Elmar Schütze: Criticism of the breed list in the dog law: "The problem is often at the other end of the leash". In: Berliner Zeitung . (BLZ) from December 19, 2013, ( online ).
  120. ↑ Barbara Schöning: Animal welfare aspects in behavior therapy of conspicuous dogs . In: Animal Welfare: Claim - Responsibility - Reality . Conference report of the 2nd ÖTT conference, May 4, 2011, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna. Vienna 2011, ISBN 978-3-9502915-1-3 , pp. 65-72 ( online [PDF]).
  121. ↑ Sandra Bruns: Five dog breeds and one dog type in the character test according to the Lower Saxony Dangerous Animal Ordinance of July 5, 2000: Factors that distinguish biting from non-biting dogs . Inaugural dissertation to obtain the degree of Doctor of Veterinary Medicine (Dr. med. Vet.) By the University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover. Hanover 2003 ( here online (PDF; 5.5 MB) [accessed on November 20, 2011]).
  122. ↑ Dorothea Döring, Angela Mittmann, Barbara M. Schneider, Michael H. Erhard: General leash constraint for dogs - an animal protection problem? About the dichotomy between security and animal welfare . In: Deutsches Tierärzteblatt . No. 12 , 2008, p. 1606–1613 ( online [PDF]).