Dog attack victims, academics and professionals who publicly support the incoming ban on American XL bullies have received abuse at home, work and online in what has been labelled a “weird culture war”. The UK government announced in September that the breed will be added to the list banned under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 after a rise in attacks and fatalities. From 31 December it will be against the law to sell, abandon or let stray, give away, breed or have in public without a lead and muzzle an XL bully, and from 1 February it will be a criminal offence to own one of the dogs in England and Wales without a certificate of exemption. Animal welfare groups have argued against the ban, saying the Dangerous Dogs Act has not stopped a rise in attacks since its introduction – and claim that important work within the UK government to address wider problems has stalled due to the focus on the XL bully ban. But groups such as the Centre for Evidence-Based Regulation of Dangerous Dogs (CEBRDD), a volunteer organisation composed of professionals and academics, have argued there is evidence that the breed has a propensity for violence. Their research shows that between 2001 and 2021 there were an average of three fatalities a year. However, in 2022, 10 people were killed, four of whom were children, most of which were linked to XL bullies. As of August, as discussions of a ban were picking up pace, there had already been five deaths. In one week in July, one dog a day was killed by an American bully. The CEBRDD found that the breed is estimated to represent less than 1% of UK dogs but was behind 44% of attacks in 2023 and 75% of deaths in the last three years. The group submitted a research report to the UK government ahead of the ban being announced. But Benedict Treolar, the CEBRDD co-founder and expert in mathematical sciences, statistics and probability, said those advocating for a ban have faced a barrage of abuse. “Basically anyone who’s been public facing on the policy side got a ton of abuse, some of that has spread off online into professional spaces,” he said. CEBRDD includes Lawrence Newport, a lecturer in law at Royal Holloway, University of London, who “has been repeatedly threatened with people coming to the workplace”, Treolar said. “Somebody joins the group on false pretences claiming to be a victim of a dog attack and then they spread out on Instagram all of the names, the names of the admins of the group, etc.” A woman whose child was killed – and was only identifiable by the shoes she had bought them – became an “incredibly passionate campaigner” but was subjected to relentless online abuse, Treolar said. Another woman whose child was killed had to move house due to the “bullying” she experienced. “We know there are strong emotions here. And we believe that we’ve tried throughout to push for a relatively moderate solution. If you have a bully XL, you just need to keep it muzzled and on a lead – the dog is not going to be taken. It’s not going to be put down, and we’re trying to work really collaboratively with these people. “But it turns out that people who speak out on these subjects receive just really quite foul and abusive harassment.” Treolar said “a weird culture war” had broken out between those who campaign for dangerous dogs legislation and a “weird alliance” of animal welfare groups, such as the RSPCA, pro-hunting groups and individuals who want dangerous dogs as a status pet. “It’s just a very odd thing to turn into a big culture war, particularly given that the public overwhelmingly really is supportive of the ban,” he said. YouGov polling showed a ban on the American bully XL was supported by 57% of the public, with 17% against. However, the ban has faced severe criticism. The Dog Control Coalition – made up of the RSPCA, Blue Cross, Battersea, Dogs Trust, Hope Rescue, Scottish SPCA, the Kennel Club and British Veterinary Association – has long campaigned against banning breeds, and said it had “serious concerns about the very short amount of time in which owners have to comply with the rules”. Michael Webb, the head of policy and public affairs at Battersea Dogs & Cats Home, said: “We would strongly argue there is nothing from the experience of the 32 years of the Dangerous Dogs Act to suggest that breed-specific legislation would work. “Ultimately, we’ve seen dog attacks increase by 159% in 20 years. That’s despite the fact that we’ve already had a ban in place for dogs which was meant to solve that problem. “It takes quite a leap of faith to look at the history of banning different breed types and think that that’s the solution to this problem.” There are logistical and practical issues with hurrying through the ban. Webb highlights challenges with defining the breed, while vets have warned they may not have the capacity to conduct all the mandatory neutering procedures required by those who apply for an exemption. A spokesperson for the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said: “Whilst we are currently focused on the quick and decisive action needed to protect the public by banning the XL bully type, we are still committed to the taskforce and delivering the report.”