Fatal dog attacks,need info on breeds other than Rottis/APBT

[imported_Cassie]

I am just wondering if any one has links or facts about fatal dog attacks involving breeds other than Rotties, APBT's, Mastiffs, Shepherds etc.
I am composing a little bit of literature of why Education is better than banning breeds. I thought it would be good to include attacks made by breeds least expected to exhibit aggression.

We have had a new law passed in my area which Rotties and APBT's, American Staff"s and Staff's require muzzling when in public and more liability insurance. This I have no qualms with...
but, recently we have had a few people who are pushing to have these breeds banned. I just want to make a point of how education is the key, learning is power. I also want to point out that Banning breeds is impossible and by banning such breeds such as Rotties, APBT's and Staff's...whose to say that people won't bring in breeds such as Fila's, Dogo's and other breeds? When you ban a few, you may as well just ban ALL guarding dogs, or perhaps droving breeds etc.

Any way, if any one could be of help I would really appreciate it :wink:
Thanks.

[disSanFranchised]

Off another board:

If you look at the breeds responsible for the most dog bite fatalities over the years, the breed at the top of the list is always the most numerous large breed. 30 years ago it was Dobies and GSDs. Note that the actual number of dog bite fatalities has remained constant at around 12 deaths/year. Also note that in the case of a "mixed breed" dog, each supposed breed gets counted. So, for example, if a pit/rottie mix causes a fatality, both "pit bulls" and rottweiler's tally gets increased by one. This means that if you add up the number of deaths attributed to all breeds the total exceeds the actual number of deaths.

Without information on the absolute number of each breed, the total deaths caused by a breed is meaningless in terms of the breed's temperment. If half the large dogs in shelters are pits (certainly a low estimate), one might conclude that half the large dogs around are pits, and half the dog bite fatalities would logically be expected to be caused by pits. This doesn't mean pit bulls are inherently more vicious than other breeds, it just means there are a lot of them out there these days.

Not to mention the misappropriation of both mixed-breed pits and just random mutts who may or may not resemble pits as "pit bulls."

[pitbullEmily]

[url]http://www.fataldogattacks.com/statistics.html[/url]

There are very very very few dog-related fatalaties. Consistently over the past 35 years, about 13/year.

There are very very very many non-fatal dogbites, but there are no reliable breed statistics about nonfatal bites..

Though I don't think arguing about statistics is the best way to go. There are too many questionable aspects to how they are collected.

I think the better ways are 1) ineffectiveness ... the bad people with the effected breeds will either just ignore the law or go on to some worse dog 2) cost... how do they intend to enforce the new laws? With what personnel? Are they enforcing existing laws? 3) efficiency... do they really want law enforcement to spend valuable time wondering whether a particular dog is a banned breed? And are they prepared for the time they will have to spend defending their actions in court? 4) fairness... why should responsible lawabiding owners not be allowed to own their dog of choice? [/url]

[Guest Anonymous]

My favorite new stat is:

The average person has one female breast and one testicle.

___

Statistics can be used to prove just about anything.

This is one of my favorite sites:

[url]http://www.nsc.org/lrs/statinfo/odds.htm[/url]

Watch out for hot tap water.

[imported_Cassie]

I am not looking for stat's on dog bites or stats on stats on fatal dog attacks. I just basically want to start out my response to a certain letter to the edititor in our paper today with a few fatal dog attacks from breeds other than Rotties, APBT's etc. In his letter written in our local paper he has listed a few fatal attacks in our area , one by 3 Rotties which killed a little boy, and one (not in my area) from a Bull Mastiff which killed a little girl...we don't have alot of APBT's in our area...perhaps a ratio of about 1 in 100...we have perhaps a ratio of 50 to 100 Rotties in my area though.

I guess I just wanted to mention that any breed has the potential to attack. I am not fighting this with statistics...especially here in Canada we have the worst stat's for dog bites etc.

Thanks for the links I am going to review them now :wink:

I just wanted people to know I am just looking for examples not Stat's :wink: for instance, I heard that a West Highland white terrier killed a child, etc. I just want a few facts just to use as examples in my article.

I am going to word this article in such a way that it is not placing blame on any breed in particular. I am going to review how important the critical period of socialization is. I am also going to review predatory drives and how normal they are for our dogs. I am also going to discuss how it is not wise to leave any child with any dog. I will discuss over breeding, bad breeding etc.
I have alot more which I am going to discuss in my literature and I will post it for every one to critic. I am not aiming to shoot this person down who wrote the letter to the editor wanting to ban breeds. I just want to educate people.

[courtnek]

the problem is in the "reporting"...people get bit by a Cocker (I have heard one of the top dogs on the biting list, from vets) to Chi's to dachsunds to whatever. Little dog bites get reported much less often than big ones, for obvious reasons. Little dog bites cause much less damage then big dog bites, to the human anatomy. Little dog bites require less emergency room treatment. If everyone was required to report every bite, the stats would change. nothing against little dogs in general, but they bite as aften as big dogs. the damage is not so great, so it doesnt get reported as often.

[courtnek]

Prim. yur not helping...

as usual..

[__crazy_canine__]

Uh, Court, you gotta just ignore her remember? :D :wink:

...sry I have no links or info to help you Cassie.

[Sarahstaff]

Hey, primmy...

[img]http://elmothesbt.homestead.com/files/tttp.jpg[/img]

[imported_Cassie]

[quote]Yes. It is by far best to stay away from those pesky statistics if you are trying to "prove" that pit bulls and rotties are no more dangerous than, say, west highland white terriers. Don't forget to mention the pomeranian cross that killed a child, too. And just hope nobody mentions the 90 pit bull type dogs that killed people in the same time period.

Of course, it might be a better strategy to actually try to change a few things so that pit bulls and rotties don't kill and maim quite so many people. Then you wouldn't have to play fast and loose and try to distract people from statistics. [/quote]
Primrose wrote.

You know when I really think about it this is not what I wanted to portray...but, it does sound this way.
I guess my intention was to outline a few attacks by other breeds, not to take the attention away from the breeds they are specifically planning on banning...but, to open peoples eyes that in the right circumstance etc. that any dog can be dangerous. I am not trying to take peoples attention away from certain breeds.
When I think about it it does sound childess and silly...basically trying to point blame in another direction. It wasn't my intent, but, it possibly would have come across that way.

I have no problem with our current laws for breed specific dogs requiring muzzles when in public, or by the increase in my insurance. In my mind if you want certain breeds then you should pay for them.

I thought it would be a good idea to write a letter to the editor in order to counteract the proposed breed bans. I feel education and stiffer fines would be a more logical route for dog violations. Perhaps with bigger fines they could put the money towards hiring more animal control personal.
My thoughts on breed banning are, they don't work. You ban the Rotties, the APBT's the Staff's and then people bring in Fila's, Dogo's,Dougu de bordeaux etc. the list goes on. Some breeds which would make APBT's and Rotties look like pussy cats would then be brought in. Some of these breeds even "look" sweet.

I will have to find a better approach to writing my letter to the editor. I think I'll do research instead of cities which do have breed specific bans on dogs are making out with it.

The issue which bothers me the most about the whole breed ban is the fact that the only people it will affect are law abiding citizens. It will not affect drug dealers or other criminals. Heck, if they can hide drugs they can certainly hide a dog.

Well, back to the drawing board on this idea.
Perhaps I'll just keep my pen locked away as I don't seem to possess the right words to express myself and to get across my point that banning breeds will not work.

[imported_Cassie]

Primrose,
Thanks for the information. I am not very good at expressing myself. I will pick up that book, although my intention is not to play any "throw the blame on other breeds" statergy.
My boss at the grooming shop and the vets at the clinic are all willing to help put together a thoughtful letter. We are also emphasizing education and making proper breed choices for your living situation.
We have an officer from the local Canine unit who is going around to all the schools in our province and discussing with the children dog behavior. He is doing this in a easy to understand language (for children) and he is using his service dog to show examples of how easily an accident can happen.
Citizens are really pushing for banning specific breeds...especially Rottweilers, ever since we had a mauling death which involved 3 Rotties and a little boy. I am horrified at what happened to the little boy, and I am horrified at the events which lead to his death. The little boy did not have a stable home and was left unsupervised with the dogs left outside running at large.
There are so many things I don't think our public realizes about our furry little friends. Pack mentality, predatory drives, dominance aggression, fear aggression, offensive aggression...etc etc.

[quote]I think you should emphasize that enforcement of existing laws is all that is needed to protect the public. Unfortunately, muzzle laws just spread the notion that the affected breeds are evil and they also do nothing to protect the three year old visiting in the home of the muzzled dog when it is unmuzzled. Plus, there is some thought that muzzles can actually affect dog temperament adversely, by making the dog feel vulnerable all the time. [/quote]
Primrose
This is a very good point. Most dogs attacks do happen in the home, or owners yard. Also alot of dogs do feel vulnerable with a muzzle on, in one of my obedience classes we have a couple of Shepherds and Rotties which the obedience trainer insists have muzzles on during class (possibly due to the dogs looking at the smaller dogs in the class as prey objects) these dogs spend the whole time trying to get the muzzles off....they also jog around the room in a defensive body carraige. My Rottie does not have any problems with her muzzle. I do put her muzzle on when we are going to an area where there may be other dogs (especially small dogs). She has a basket muzzle, we have had people stop and ask if I was trying to make her look like hannibal the cannibal.

I don't think the owners of the breeds the public wants to ban will have any problems with forcer laws being imposed. We do have some great dogs laws in place, but, no one enforces them. With the help of the local Vets, animal control, SPCA, etc. we can perhaps have these laws enforced.

Thanks Primrose for your insight and keeping me from writing a letter which would have possibly made the situation worse. It probably would have put some people on the defensive. I will take your suggestions.

I guess that when you feel as though you are backed into a corner...you can and will strike out with any thing. Written words are impossible to retract.