RESPONSIBLE ownership is “not reflected in what we see daily”, according to the JSPCA amid ongoing concerns about changes to the Island’s Dogs Law.
The legislative changes proposed by the Constables Committee, including compulsory registration for XL Bully-type dogs and restrictions around breeding, neutering and muzzling the animals, were approved in principle by the States Assembly last week, and are now being subject to the Scrutiny process before being finalised early in 2026.
In a submission to the Environment, Housing and Infrastructure panel, the association expressed concerns around enforcement, resourcing and the likelihood of non-compliance, as well as a preference for a behavioural and ownership-based framework.
The charity said: “While some members stated that ‘most dog owners are fully responsible’, we must emphasise that this is unfortunately not reflected in what we see daily. Jersey continues to see high numbers of dogs with poor socialisation, reactivity and behavioural issues.”
The JSPCA added: “There are currently no facilities or capacity for seizure, no clarity around assessment or handling, and no funding identified for these functions.
“References to an unnamed ‘local trainer’ raises further concern, as canine behaviour and training is an unregulated industry, and without knowing the individual’s qualifications, accreditation or methodology, it is impossible to be assured of welfare-centred or evidence-based practice.”
The area described by the association as its “core concern” – the ineffectiveness of breed-specific legislation in preventing serious incidents – has yet to be addressed, the submission adds.
“Our original submission referenced extensive evidence from multiple jurisdictions evidencing ineffectiveness and subsequent retraction [of legslation] in many countries.
“As highlighted in the debate, the UK’s Dangerous Dogs Act continues to be widely regarded as ineffective and problematic; serious dog attacks have increased across the UK despite the introduction of breed-specific restrictions and many fatal incidents occur indoors, involving exempted or registered dogs.”
Scrutiny panel chair Deputy Hilary Jeune sought to postpone last week’s debate by proposing a so-called reference back in order that concerns were addressed, but this move was defeated by 22-19.
Although the Constables Committee proposition was subsequently approved in principle, Deputy Jeune confirmed afterwards that her panel would be “calling in” the legislation in order to review it and seek clarification on certain areas.
Although the JSPCA submission referenced a lack of consultation prior to last week’s debate, Mr Jackson told the JEP he met representatives from both the association and States of Jersey Police yesterday for what he described as “a useful round-table discussion”.
“I think the issues are surmountable,” he said. “The main element of this legislation is around registration of dogs on import.”
Mr Jackson acknowledged that there were currently no facilities where seized dogs could be held and that this situation would need to be reviewed.
The Scrutiny panel is set to discuss the matter further during a public hearing with Mr Jackson tomorrow.
