BEHAVIOUR - Dog Bite Prevention and BSL, What Works?

When it comes to breed specific legislation (BSL), emotions run high and empirical evidence is lacking.

The dogs most commonly targeted for BSL are “pit bulls,” a group that includes Bull terriers, Staffordshire bull terriers, American pit bull terriers, American Staffordshire terriers, and any mix of these breeds.

Identifying pit bulls is a challenge, since the validity of genetic testing is ineffective because “pit bull” is a type rather than a recognized breed, and identification based on physical characteristics is unreliable.

BSL has been enacted in many jurisdictions globally, despite evidence that bite frequency does not drop as a result.

In fact, some jurisdictions have seen an increase in bite frequency following BSL.

Toronto, as a notable Canadian example, has had an increase in bite instances since instituting a pit bull ban in 2005. The Netherlands repealed a 15-year ban after finding that dog bite frequency had not been reduced.

When a jurisdiction is used as its own control, meaning that the jurisdiction is tested against itself before and after enacting BSL, there is no significant reduction in incidence.

So why does it remain such a popular option if it is expensive to enact, difficult to maintain, and demonstrably ineffective?

One study published by the AVMA suggests that this enthusiasm is due to a misperception of risk (people believe that the risk associated with dog bites is higher than it is, and that the risk associated with certain breeds is higher than it is), stereotyping and misinformation about breeds, and the belief that BSL is effective despite evidence to the contrary.

There are alternatives, and they appear to be effective. Italy repealed its breed-specific regulations in 2009, and replaced them with laws that focus on the owner. Health Undersecretary Francesca Martini said, “The measures adopted in the previous laws had no scientific foundation… With this law we have overcome the black list, which was just a fig leaf (over the larger problem), and we have increased the level of guarantees for citizens.”

Calgary, Alberta has adopted a similar approach to dog bite prevention, focusing on owner education and placing the responsibility for safety on the owners, rather than the dogs.

Calgary-based trainer Megan Armstrong, CPDT-KSA, CBCC-KA, agrees that focusing on the owner is critical. “We must better educate dog owners on canine communication and body language… In an ideal world, we would be looking at it being mandatory that dog owners train and socialize their dogs versus putting the blame on a breed. Dogs follow our direction, so we must hold dog owners more accountable to how they are training and raising them versus making the dog pay for our errors.”

Despite this evidence, and public support for owner-focused legislation from high-profile pet organizations such as the National Companion Animal Coalition, BSL seems here to stay.

As some repeal BSL, other jurisdictions, like Quebec, are currently contemplating enacting it. And some Canadian insurance providers deny coverage to pit bull owners, or charge higher premiums for owners of pit bulls.

By Tiffany Sostar

Tiffany is a writer, editor, academic, and animal lover who came late to her appreciation of pets. At 18, a rescue pup named Tasha saved her from a depression and she hasn't looked back. She has worked as the canine behaviour program coordinator for the Calgary Humane Society, and was a dog trainer specializing in working with fearful and reactive dogs for many years. She doesn't have any pets right now, but makes up for it by giving her petsitting clients (and any dogs she comes across on her frequent coffee shop adventures) extra snuggles.

Despite Breed Ban, Toronto Dog Bites Increase

(bestfriends.org)

Despite a breed-based ban culminating in a dramatic drop in the number of pit bull type dogs in Ontario, reported cases of canine bites has increased.

In Toronto, for instance, there were 576 bites in 2004 (a year before the ban) and 767 in 2014, Global News recently reported.

The numbers are not what those who backed the ban would have predicted. 

Indeed, then-Attorney General Michael Bryant, assured the ban was “the beginning of the end of the reign of terror, imposed by pit bulls” and would “over time” mean “fewer pit pull attacks.”

Now, however, the question illustrated by Global News remains – if almost all the pit bulls are gone, why do dog bite numbers continue to climb?

Parkdale-High Park MPP Cheri DiNovo, says it is because the problem was never with pit bulls. “I’m not surprised at all by those statistics,” she told Global. “I would think they were inevitable.”

Under the ban, four breeds often all referred to a'pit bulls' (pit bull terriers, American Staffordshire terriers, Staffordshire bull terriers and American pit bull terriers) had to be kept muzzled or leashed in public and sterilized within two months of its passage and it became illegal to breed the dogs or import them into the province.

There are now just over 300 pit bulls in Ontario compared with more than 1,400 about a decade ago – and in theory, pit bulls should cease to exist in Toronto by 2020.

But as pit bull numbers dwindle, dog bites have continued to climb since 2012. In Toronto, bites hit the highest levels recorded this century in 2013 and 2014.

That is because other dogs do the biting.

In 2014, German shepherds, labs, and Rottweilers were among the top offenders along with little dogs including Jack Russell terriers, shih tzus and Maltese.

Some believe breed-based bans are a practical ploy to improve public safety.

While others, like Teegan Buckingham, with the Toronto Humane Society, say it has punished a particular breed - the Ontario Veterinary Medical Association estimating the law, by 2012, had led to more than 1,000 of the demonized dogs and puppies with no history of violence being euthanized. “We would love to see the pit bull ban lifted,” Buckingham told Global.

DiNovo favours a system similar to Calgary where officials have seen a dramatic drop in bites since the 1980s without a breed-based ban but by promoting education of dog owners, children and strict enforcement.

Bill Bruce, Calgary's animal services director at the time, spoke before an Ontario government committee several years after it imposed its ban to debunk beliefs it would mean less bites.

“What we did learn is that when you do ban a breed, of course, the bites go down for that specific breed; that’s no surprise,” Bruce told the committee. “If there are fewer of them, there are fewer opportunities. But what we found is that bites tend to go up dramatically in other breeds. Any dog, again, can bite, and it’s coming back on the owner to make that determination if a dog is safe or not.”

Dr. Dale Scott, president of the Ontario Veterinary Association at the time, told the committee breed-based bans do not work because they are based on incorrect assumptions not backed by scientific research - “that only certain breeds are dangerous and that all dogs that belong to those breeds are dangerous.”

By Nadia Moharib

Nadia Moharib is an animal lover who has adopted everything from birds to hamsters, salamanders, rabbits, fish and felines. She has written about all-things-pets for years and was a long-time editor of a pet magazine in a daily newspaper which featured a Q & A column, Ask Whit, penned by her pooch (ghost written, of course.) The serial dog owner lives in Calgary, Alberta and most days can be found at a dog park picking up after her rescue pooch, Scoots.

RESEARCH - DNA Study Shows Inconsistent Identification of Pit Bulls

A recent survey shows shelter staff are inconsistent and often incorrect when it comes to identifying a dog's breed - a potentially devastating, if not deadly, error for any canine labelled a pit bull.

"In the high-stakes world of animal shelters, a dog's life might depend on a potential adopter's momentary glimpse and assumptions about its suitability as a pet. If shelter staff has labelled the dog as a pit bull, its chances for adoption automatically go down in many shelters,” says Julie Levy, professor of shelter medicine at the University of Florida College of Veterinary Medicine and the lead author of a study published in The Veterinary Journal.

"Identification of dogs as pit bulls can trigger an array of negative consequences, from the loss of housing to being seized by animal control, to the taking of the dog's life."

The findings show one in five dogs genetically identified as 'pit bulls' were missed by shelter staff while one in three deemed to be pit bulls had genetic testing which contradicted the claim.

More than half (52%) of staff identified dogs as pit bull-type when in fact DNA showed only 21% were indeed pit bull type.

The findings are troubling given shelter staff and veterinarians are often expected to guess a dog's breed based on appearance alone and potential adopters often infer, based on apparent breed, what kind of pet a particular pooch will make.

The past few decades have seen an increase in ownership restrictions on breeds including pit bulls and dogs that resemble them based on assumptions certain breeds are inherently dangerous, that such dogs can be reliably identified and restrictions will improve public safety, the study states.

That reality, in addition to negative stereotypes dogging pit bull-types, means inconsistency by shelter staff to correctly identify a breed can be dangerous - the designation often devastating, and at times a death sentence, for dogs waiting to be adopted.

"These results raise difficult questions because shelter workers and veterinarians are expected to determine breeds of dogs in their facilities on a daily basis. Additionally, they are often called on as experts as to whether a dog's breed will trigger confiscation or regulatory action. The stakes for these dogs and their owners are in many cases very high,” Levy says.

"A dog's physical appearance cannot tell observers anything about its behaviour. Even dogs of similar appearance and the same breed often have diverse behavioural traits in the same way human siblings often have very different personalities.”

Researchers evaluated breed assessments of 120 dogs made by 16 shelter workers, including four veterinarians, at four facilities – all had a minimum of three years experience working at shelters.

Then researchers developed DNA profiles from blood samples taken from each dog and compared the findings against staff assessments.

Levy suggests, rather than relying on a dog's appearance or apparent breed as a predictor of behaviour, public safety would be better served by taking steps to prevent dog bites, including supervising children, understanding canine body language, fixing dogs and socializing puppies.

By Nadia Moharib
Nadia Moharib is an animal lover who has adopted everything from birds to hamsters, salamanders, rabbits, fish and felines. She has written about all-things-pets for years and was a long-time editor of a pet magazine in a daily newspaper which featured a Q & A column, Ask Whit, penned by her pooch (ghost written, of course.) The serial dog owner lives in Calgary, Alberta and most days can be found at a dog park picking up after her rescue pooch, Scoots.

Breed Bans Could Lead to More Dog Bites in Calgary

In May the city of Calgary has had five dog attacks in five days and several of these attacks involved pit bulls. The City of Calgary is looking into higher licensing fees for breeds considered to be dangerous and stronger penalties for owners of dogs that bite. A breed ban similar to those in Winnipeg, Denver, and Ontario has been brought up.

Bill Bruce was a director of Calgary Animal and Bylaw Services and designed Calgary’s bylaw for Responsible Pet Ownership. this bylaw focuses on animal sterilization, training, socialization, exercise, and medical care.

Bruce believes that a breed ban would be counterproductive, it is an owner’s responsibility to ensure their dog is well trained and prevent bites. Bruce said, “You want to be so careful in your legislation that you’re not negatively impacting responsible people. If you look at the Ontario numbers, you look at the Winnipeg numbers, they haven’t gone down in bite numbers. Yes, they’ve got less bites by pit bulls, but their bite numbers are generally up.”

If pit bulls are banned then people may just replace them with other dangerous/aggressive dogs. Bruce says, “All dogs can and will bite. All that happens is your bites shift to another breed.”

Barbara Walmer, Behaviour Department Head at the Calgary Humane Society said dog attacks are not breed specific. Walmer says, “We need to educate people on training and socialization and basically responsible pet ownership,” she said. “If dogs are not social, we need to make sure we’re using preventive measures such as muzzles and leashes to prevent those interactions from happening.”

The director of Denver’s Animal Protection, Alice Nightengale, said Denver’s ban is due to the severity of bites. From 2007-1012 the Coalition for Living Safely with Dogs found that Labrador retrievers bit most, followed by pit bulls.

Calgary’s Ward 2 Councillor, Joe Magliocca wanted to require muzzles on all dogs in public until they are trained. Once dogs are trained they would be required to wear coloured bandana to indicate how dangerous they are. Magliocca withdrew this action following many complaints.

READ THE NEWS ARTICLE

Dr. Emily Weiss on an increasing pit-bull popularity

Dr. Emily Weiss, a Certified Applied Animal Behaviouralist with the American SPCA (ASPCA) recently spoke out about the increasing popularity of pit-bull type dogs and their fate when it comes to humane and rescue.

In an ASPCA blog post, Weiss' research indicates that while pit-bull type breeds are the third most adopted breed (according to data from over 30 American shelters), they are also relinquished and euthanized at a much higher rate than other breeds.

"Maybe we do not have an adoption program but instead we have a volume issue. One-third more pit bulls enter than the next highest intake breed type," said Weiss in her post. "Why are they coming in at such a higher volume? Given the level of popularity - number five most popular with Banfield clients - we would anticipate they would not be the number one intake type."

Weiss hypothesized that part of the problem lies with the difficulty of finding housing that will allow pit-bull type breeds. 

With these conflicting numbers, Weiss asked for feedback and experiences from the pet industry and pet owners. She expressed a desire and determination to find a solution to a problem faced by shelters across the country as well as the dogs themselves. 

READ THE STORY HERE

Colour coding canines to curb dog bites

Photo found HERE

The fourth dog attack in a matter of weeks has one Calgary man calling for an unprecedented bylaw that will use colour coded collars or tags to identify aggressive dogs. 

Calgary business man, Sebastian Yoon, has proposed a bylaw that would see aggressive dogs coded with a red collar or tag, dogs with no past aggression issues with pink and three additional in-between levels. 

The article, published by CTV News received mixed reactions though a larger number of comments cited negative reviews. While many gave Yoon props for taking a proactive approach, the general feeling was that dogs owners, not dogs, need to be the source of change. 

"It's great that he's trying to come up with ways to keep the dog parks safe, but this just isn't a realistic idea... We need to be looking more into the dog owners themselves, and understand that they need to start being accountable for their actions."- Blamethedeednotthebreed

JOIN THE CONVERSATION 

Guardian or Owner - What's best for pets?

Industry leaders are working to eliminate the barriers to the awesome pet experience pet families desire. As they have discovered, sometimes it is the very language used by industry that creates problems for pets and pet families.

Legal minds are addressing what is best for both parties when it comes to the use of words like guardian or ownership. In 2003, 2005 and again in 2010 the AVMA addressed the situation as follows: 

The American Veterinary Medical Association promotes the optimal health and welfare of animals. Further, the AVMA recognizes the role of responsible owners in providing for their animals' care. Any change in terminology describing the relationship between animals and owners, including "guardian," does not strengthen this relationship and may, in fact, harm it. Such changes in terminology may adversely affect the ability of society to obtain and deliver animal services and, ultimately, result in animal suffering.  (Approved by the AVMA Executive Board May 2003; Revised by the Task Force on Legal Status of Animals-AVMA Executive Board April 2005; Reaffirmed by the AVMA Executive Board April 2010)

In October a US lawyer, well known for her advocacy on behalf of 'Pit Bulls' wrote a blog that discusses the use of these words in some depth.

Read the Blog