A final word on Pit Bulls and other aggressive breeds
Thanks very much for all of your responses. I appreciate your sending along your opinions. I understand your passion for the Pit Bull and your concerns for the dilemma it faces in our society today.
I want to clear up several misunderstandings about what my position is and what I have to say about your breed and other aggressive dog breeds.
I did not express any dislike for the Pit Bull whatsoever. My comments were in regard to the breed's purpose. Dog fighting of any kind is banned and illegal in every civilized country in the world. Watching dogs slaughter one another is no longer considered entertainment. The Pit Bull therefore can no longer serve its original function, unlike other breeds that still retrieve, point, protect, herd, do scent work, hunt large or small game, rescue, or are ratters, etc. The original purpose of the Pit Bull is obsolete and no longer acceptable in a civilized society.
I never stated nor would I support the position that the Pit Bull breed should be banned.
The answer I gave was given in the context of a local family tv show during which I was asked which breeds I would recommend for easygoing people and which breeds I would recommend such people steer clear of. I think that my answer was a fair one given that the Pit Bull is a fighting dog that is not appropriate for the average family, who would be better off with a Golden Retriever. I also think it is fair to say that rough and tough active people usually own a rough and tumble dog, just as soft and quiet people tend to own soft, easygoing dogs. This does not represent a condemnation of anyone.
As to banning breeds of dogs, as much as I don't agree with nor would I participate in these bans, I would not fight against them either, even though one of the first breeds to go would be my beloved German Shepherd, which when poorly trained is without a doubt one of the worst offenders when it comes to serious dog bites. In places where the Pit Bull and German Shepherd Dog, for example, have been banned, or there are muzzle restrictions in place, serious injuries due to dog bites have dropped to zero and bites in general decreased 70%.
It is hard to argue with these facts. When push comes to shove, I care more about the safety of children than I do about my own favorite breed.
The Pit Bull fancy has much less to fear from me than they do from many Pit Bull owners themselves. If the majority of the e-mails I received, full of misrepresentation, hatred, and personal attacks, are any indication of the majority of Pit Bull owners, you have much to be concerned about. I think it is time that the Pit Bull fancy stop describing their dog as docile, harmless, loving and caring, which is a description that I have never used for the German Shepherd Dog. In fact I admonish everyone who owns a German Shepherd to take full responsibility for their dog and its aggressive tendencies.
We as dog lovers owe it to the general public to be clear and forthright about the true nature of our dogs, because it is this very nature that we admire about them.
I think that my book has a lot to offer the Pit Bull fancy, and condemning me and my book will do nothing to solve the problem that Pit Bull owners have created for themselves. In fact my book would do a great deal in helping Pit Bull owners to train their dogs properly and eliminate much of the unwanted aggression these dogs exhibit.
Society has changed and is changing and we dog lovers need to change our attitudes toward public responsibility if we are to avoid being left behind. Society does not have endless patience and will sooner or later eliminate all "problem" dogs if we do not act in our own best interests. The Pit Bull fancy's organized response of "attacking the messenger" -- misrepresenting any comment they perceive as negative, and pretending that the average Pit Bull is as gentle as the average Golden Retriever -- may produce reluctance in some people to speak out about dogs, but this is a double edged sword. If the owners of aggressive breeds like the Pit Bull, the German Shepherd, and the Rottweiler, among others, do not acknowledge their aggressive tendencies and train accordingly, in the end it will be the dogs themselves that will pay, with extinction, for the actions of those who claim to care about them so much.
Labels: Aggressive Dog Breeds, Breed Bans, Pit Bulls
posted by Dale Stavroff @ 2:06 PM
2 Comments
2 Comments:
Dale,
To be perfectly fair, while the pit bull breeds were initially bred for baiting and dog fighting, they did still serve several other important roles as working dogs and still do today; catch work. Catch work is still a practice alive and well in America. Although not so often with cattle and horses, it is very prominent in free range pig farming and feral pig hunting. Pit bulls, along with catahoulas and black mouth curs, make some of the best catch dogs around due to their strength and tenacity. This is an especially important service to farmers, as wild hogs are considered a severe nuisance A pack of about 30 wild hogs (which is a moderately sized herd) can completely destroy a field overnight.
Aside from still having a real, working purpose today, pit bulls ARE NOT bred to be human aggressive. Because dog fighting requires that the dogs' handlers as well as a referee be present in the pit with the fighting dogs, the breeds of the pit bull type intentionally bred out tendencies of human aggression. This is not to say a pit bull cannot be aggressive to humans. Any breed can. This is especially true one or several key conditions are met.
1) Lack of socialization. Dogs are social animals and need to feel like they are members of their human "pack". Exclusion from this can cause frustration and aggression to build in a dog.
2) Long term/permanent tethering. This goes hand in hand with socializing. Dogs naturally do not like leashes. Putting a dog on a leash to be left away from human contact for long periods of time is EXTREMELY frustrating to an animal. Given their limited range of an area, tethered dogs become very protective of their territory, even when it is new to them (ie, a chained dog that gets loose and goes at large in a neighborhood).
3) Neutering and spaying. De-sexing a dog fixes two problems with aggressive dogs; the desire to seek out a mate and the aggression triggered by rivalry for mating rights/interrupting of intercourse. It also has the benefit in helping with animal population control, which in many larger areas is something that is seriously needed anyway.
I find it unfortunate that people express that pit bulls were a breed type intended for human aggression when the exact opposite is true. I do realize that the strong bond between dog and master that pit bulls and their owners develop (which in my opinion, is stronger than a similar relationship with ANY other breed, as these dogs willingly fight and die for their masters) does make the dogs extremely malleable, I would not say this is something that can imply that the breed is innately human aggressive. It takes a lot of neglect and cruelty to make a vicious pit bull. All it takes is the love a good dog owner of ANY breed gives their animals to have a perfectly sound, happy pit that's true pleasure in life is to please mankind.
Sincerely,
Greg
Having conducted eight years of research into dog biting incidents around the world, I find some of the statements highly questionable.
I must preface the following by pointing out I have no particular affinity for 'pit bulls' (or Labrador Retrievers, or Shih Tzus, etc.) With 30 years experience training dogs, and a decade spent specializing in rehabilitating aggressive dogs (of all breeds/mixes), I find dogs of the same temperament type respond similarly to ethical training methods, no matter what breed/shape/size/coat length/colour they are.
Let me begin by saying that I have yet to come across any region that can prove a reduction in the number, or severity, of dog bites based solely on breed-specific restrictions.
Of course, those responsible for passing breed-specific legislation typically claim the measures have been a success. They typically arbitrarily just announce the measures have been successful with remarkably absent data to back them up. It is also a common tactic to mislead the public by saying “bites by the dogs” have been virtually eliminated, when what is really meant is bites by now non-existent ‘pit bulls’, have been reduced. (By that logic, a ‘pit bull’ ban also reduces the number of wooly mammoth attacks. It’s specious reasoning, meant to mislead a poorly-informed populace.)
I, and others, have undeniably proven that some of the most famous claims of success have been completely erroneous.
For example, England's Dangerous Dogs Act, enacted in 1991, is often hailed as a success.
However, by 1996, five years after the 'pit bull' ban was first implemented, there had already been a 25% increase in dog bite-related hospitalizations. As of 2006, there had been a 100% increase in hospitalizations due to dog bites. Savage attacks by dogs of all sizes and shapes continue to occur in unprecedented numbers in England.
Winnipeg, Canada is another excellent example of an alleged success.
While Winnipeg officials still claim the ban has been a success, a 1990 ban on 'pit bulls' led to an average of 50 more bites per year for the following decade, as well as huge increases in bites by other breeds.
For instance, when 'pit bulls' were banned in Winnipeg in 1990, they had been responsible for 11 bites. German Shepherds and crosses, in the #1 spot for biting, were responsible for 68 bites. In 1991 that figure had skyrocketed to 92 bites. There was no improvement by 1992, with 97 bites attributed to German Shepherds and their crosses.
By 2001, German Shepherds & crosses, Rottweilers & crosses, and Labrador Retrievers & crosses made up not only the top 3 spots in the bite statistics, but the majority of reported bites, as well.
Kitchener, Canada, is also often used as an example of a successful 'pit bull' ban. The city banned 'pit bulls' in 1997, before ever having conducted any research.
In reality, the figures were startling, once they came to light. In 1996, there had been 18 bites attributed to 'pit bull'-type dogs, which put them in the #8 spot, right behind #7 Poodles. #1 German Shepherds were attributed with 85 bites. Once this information became public, the city stopped keeping dog bite statistics by breed.
Still, since all animal bites must be reported to the Medical Officer of Health in that region, it was possible to see if the ban had reduced the number of bites. A little sleuthing proved that, eight years after Kitchener banned 'pit bulls', dog bite numbers had remained the same. They hadn't been reduced one bit. The ban wasn't a success.
The province of Ontario passed a law banning 'pit bulls' after every reputable expert opposed the measure.
For the record, 'pit bulls' have never been responsible for the most bites or attacks in Ontario (or Canada, for that matter). There has never been a human fatality officially attributed to an unprovoked attack by a 'pit bull', in Canadian history. Since ‘pit bulls’ were banned in Ontario, a number of cities have shown significant increases in the number of dog bites. Some are calling it a dog bite epidemic...since ‘pit bulls’ were banned.
Many people incorrectly claim that, while 'pit bulls' may not bite or kill the most, when they do bite, they cause more damage than other types of dogs. Again, there is no credible evidence to this end. In fact, 'pit bulls' do sometimes bite, but they are notably absent from the top spots in hospital injury reporting data.
For example, the Canadian Hospital Injury Reporting and Prevention Program (CHIRPP) keeps data on dog bite injuries treated in participating hospitals. It's reasonable to conclude these incidents represent a sampling of the most serious dog bite injuries that occur in Canada, given that they require treatment in hospital. (Only about 8% of dog bites are reported. Only a small percentage of those are treated in a hospital.)
Here are the results of their report on the breeds responsible for the most serious dog bite injuries in the Canadian hospital system:
“Of the 385 records in the study, 278 (72.2%) specified the breed of the dog. There were 50 types of purebreds and 33 types of cross-breeds identified. The most common breeds were German Shepherds (40), Cocker Spaniels (16), Rottweilers (16) and Golden Retrievers (15).”
Most people just don’t know what the heck they’re talking about when it comes to which breeds bite most often or cause the worst injuries. Even fewer seem to want to accept the impact irresponsible and criminal ownership has on dog behaviour. Still fewer have the will to hold negligent dog owners accountable when they allow their dogs to become a nuisance or a danger.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home