IS BSL EFFECTIVE IN PREVENTING DOG ATTACKS?

Monday 5 September 2016

Dogs labeled as pit bulls at shelters may wait three times longer to be adopted—even when they aren’t actually pit bulls Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/call-dog-pit-bull-and-he-may-have-trouble-finding-home


Pit Bull?



An adorable shelter dog shouldn’t have a difficult time finding a home—but it might if it comes with the label “pit bull.” (LeticiaRose / iStock)

smithsonian.com



Regardless of a canine’s actual breed, simply labeling a dog a “pit bull” can condemn it to a significantly longer stay in a shelter and make it less attractive to potential adopters, concludes a new study in PLOS One.
Pit bulls are often stereotyped as aggressive and dangerous toward humans, though there is little evidence that those characteristics are inherent to the breed. The breed is popular among the dog fighting crowd, however, which contributes to its reputation for aggressiveness. To complicate matters, when attacks do occur, dogs may be labeled as pit bulls even when they are not. Indeed, in the United States, “pit bull” often serves as a catchall for a handful of breeds ranging from English bulldogs to American Staffordshire terriers; one person’s pit bull is another’s American bulldog mix.

This reputation follows the canines when they land in shelters. When potential adopters look at available dogs, they “don’t rate pit bulls any differently than look-alike dogs,” says the study’s lead author, Lisa Gunter, a graduate student in psychology at Arizona State University. “It’s only when we start attaching labels that people begin to perceive them more negatively.”
Most shelter dogs are of unknown origin, so employees often have to guess at an animal’s breed. Over a 10-year career working in shelters, Gunter noticed that she and her co-workers frequently arrived at different conclusions about a dog’s breed. And genetic studies have found significant discrepancies between descriptions of shelter dogs and their actual breed. One study found, for example, that half of the dogs that had been labeled as pit bulls at four Florida shelters had no pit bull ancestry in their DNA.
Gunter and her colleagues undertook a series of studies to find out how those potentially flawed labels might impact an animal’s chance of finding a home. They started by showing college students in California and users of the website Reddit photos of three dogs—a Labrador retriever, a pit bull-like dog and a border collie—without attached breed labels and asked questions about each, such as whether the dog looked smart or if the person would feel comfortable approaching it. The team found that participants ranked the pit bull-type dog as lowest on intelligence, friendliness, approachability and adoptability, and highest on aggressiveness and difficulty to train. When the pit bull appeared in a photo with an elderly woman or a child, however, it was rated more favorably.
Next, the researchers asked potential adopters at an Arizona shelter to rank dogs that appeared in photos and short videos on the animals’ approachability, intelligence, aggressiveness, friendliness, difficulty to train and adoptability. These scores were then summed to create an “attractiveness” composite for each pooch. To get around possible biases, such as apartment rules about animal sizes or bans on certain breeds, the team used phrases such as, “If circumstances allowed, I would consider adopting this dog,” to assess willingness to take a canine home.



These two dogs may look similar, but the pit bull label could mean that the one on the left may wait a lot longer to find a home. (Arizona Animal Welfare League)


When the dogs were not labeled as any particular breed, participants ranked pit bulls and look-alikes (dogs that were the same size and color as the pit bulls) as equally attractive. Potential adopters even ranked the pit bulls in video recordings as more attractive than the non-pit bull matches. When the researchers introduced breed labels, however, that trend reversed, with participants ranking the same dog as significantly less attractive than similar dogs without the label.
The researchers also found that pit bulls at that shelter waited over three times as long to find a home as their matched counterparts.
Finally, the team analyzed a set of data from an animal shelter in Florida that recently removed breed descriptions altogether. When freed from the loaded label, pit bull-like dogs were much more likely to find a home. Adoptions of these dogs increased by more than 70 percent, compared with the prior year, and the shelter’s euthanasia rate for the same group dropped by 12 percent, probably because more of them were finding homes.
Taken together, these results “are very convincing that breed labels negatively impact any dog that is labeled as ‘pit bull,’” says Erica Feuerbacher, who studies dogs at Carroll College in Montana and was not involved in the study. “Furthermore, we know from other studies that humans are quite bad at correctly labeling breeds, so many dogs could be erroneously labeled pit bull—even though they are not—and by that label they become less adoptable.” 
Eliminating breed labels, which people seem to be using as poor proxies for stereotyped traits, may be the key to banishing a significant amount of dog discrimination—and getting more dogs into homes, Feuerbacher and the other researchers argue. There is also a need to devise better means of measuring dogs’ true personalities, including their potential for aggression, and of ensuring those assessments are valid not just in the shelter environment but also in homes, Gunter notes.
“We want to drive the adoption conversation toward evaluating whether an individual dog, regardless of the breed, is a suitable candidate for adoption,” she says. “Then we can match-make between the personality of the dog and that of the person, instead of just relying on labels.” 

Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/call-dog-pit-bull-and-he-may-have-trouble-finding-home-180958537/#9EhU1HA9AzbKUOXT.99

Follow us: @SmithsonianMag on Twitter


Saturday 3 September 2016

The SHOCKING History Of Dog Breed Discrimination…

It’s NOT Just Pit Bulls That Are Targeted!

JULIA LYNN RUBIN
Today it’s pit bulls that have fallen victim to bad owners and breed specific legislation, but throughout history, it’s been German shepherd dogs, Rottweilers, Mastiffs, Dalmatians, and even Chow Chows.
Bad press and general fear fueled by dogfighting and abusive owners have changed the way that the general public views and has viewed these breeds, and in this post, we’ll be exploring the history behind it all and the breeds that have suffered the most as a result.

brother
“Breed specific” legislation (BSL) is any law that bans or regulates a certain breed of dog under the justification that it is necessary for public safety and will help reduce the instances of dog bites. These laws can also result in the killing of large numbers of dogs that for no other reason than they are of or look like they belong to a specific breed.
As a result, many loving owners must give up their beloved pets when they are forced to give them up (or move) due to strict housing regulations. Many of these dogs end up in already over-crowded shelters.

The "Usual Suspects"


usual-600x347

There are several breeds most commonly discriminated against, known as the “usual suspects.” A number of insurance companies deny people due to the breeds they own, while others operate on a dog-by-dog basis. However, some companies consider certain dogs to be “too much of a risk” to insure. Here are some of the usual suspects.

Pit Bulls


happy-600x600
A “pit bull” is not necessarily a single breed, but a rough categorization of three breeds: the American Pitbull terrier, the American Staffordshire terrier and the Staffordshire bull terrier.
Technically speaking, the one “true” pit bull is an American Pit Bull Terrier, though the three listed are often mistaken for one.
While pit bulls were bred to be fighting dogs, like any other dog, pits will likely grow up to be loving, wonderful pets if they are raised in dog-friendly, happy homes. Their genetic disposition does not mean that they are aggressive or prone to attacking other animals, but widely reported attacks from the turn of the century to the late 1980s eventually led to breed-specific legislation against them. During the ’80s, a number of high-profile attacks on humans led to hysteria among the affected communities, which then led to editorials and eventually, public and widespread outrage.
Remember that fighting dogs are and were trained to fight to the death, so fighting was a necessity for these animals just to stay alive, not a path they chose.

buster-brown
Despite their dark pasts as bull-baiters and fighters, and their poor reputation particularly in the 1980s and early 1990s, pits were considered to be beloved American pets throughout the early half of the century, the United States even personifying itself as a pit bull on World War I recruitment posters. A pit bull named Tige was a close companion of the comic and children’s character, Buster Brown.

German Shepherds

gsd
Tumblr

In the 1990s, several sources claimed that German Shepherd dogs are more likely to attack smaller breeds or even people. However, well-trained German Shepherds have a reputation for not only being extremely smart and hard-working, but exceptional, safe family pets.

Doberman Pinschers


dobe
Dobermans have a ferocious, aggressive stereotype, as they were originally bred to be personal protection dogs. Over the years, however, the aggression of Doberman Pinschers has been significantly toned down, and because of their high intelligence and good-natured temperament, they make great family pets.

Chow Chows

chowchow
One study concluded that Chow Chows are more likely to bite if they are male, non-neutered, and live in a home with one or more children, however, the study authors acknowledged that their research had several problems, such as excluding cases in which the victim of a bite did no seek medical attention, and failing to verify the breed of the dogs involved. While Chows are known for being fiercely protective of their loved ones, they are typically quiet, well-behaved, loyal pets.

Dalmations


dalmation-600x394
Believe it or not, these bonafide Disney stars (who doesn’t love “101 Dalmations?”) have been accused of being more likely to bite, although anti-breed discrimination activists argue that there are going to be more cases of dog bites in a breed with a larger population.

Mastiffs


mastiffs-600x396
Perhaps its their massive size that frightens people (and some insurers). Back in 2013, Breckenridge, CO considered a highly controversial BSL, despite the state being firmly anti-breed-based legislation. A report created by the chief of police included listed “Doberman, Mastiff, German Shepherd, pit bull, Malamute, Chow, Rottweiler, Husky and an “other” category” as breeds that most people are afraid of or concerned with.
Mastiffs are known for their dignified, reserved personalities, and well-socialized Mastiffs are known for greeting strangers politely.

How Can You Tell If It's a Pit?


isitapit
One of the issues that BSLs pose is that it can be quite difficult to identify a pit bull from a mixed breed or another breed altogether. As we saw earlier, the public’s perception of what a pit bull is is often confused with three specific breeds or a mix of the three (and others).
Some housing complexes list any breed with “pit” or “bull” in its name under the ban list, which may effectively ban bulldogs, French bulldogs, and any other dog that is not a pit bull at all. BSLs also can harm families seeking to adopt children.
A dog breed is a human construct used to group dogs with similar physical characteristics, yet there is no scientific test to determine a dog’s official breed.
Thanks to animallaw.info for much of the information presented in this post.
Please SHARE this important information on BSL with everyone you know!

Link..... littlethings.com

Friday 2 September 2016

No pit bull ban for Quebec, only restrictions, report recommends


Pit bulls and dogs deemed dangerous should wear muzzles in public and be sterilized, working groups says



The vast majority of pit bull owners in Quebec will be allowed to keep their dogs if the government adopts the recommendations of a report released on Wednesday.
The report comes from a working group on dangerous dogs, created last June by Public Safety Minister Martin Coiteux, after the death of a Montreal woman attacked by a dog in her backyard.
It offers 10 recommendations. Among them:
  • Creating two categories of dogs, one for dangerous "pit bull-type" breeds, and another for potentially dangerous dogs weighing 20 kg or more and trained for protection.
  • Compulsory registration for both types.
  • An obligation to keep the dogs on a leash.
  • Wearing a harness in public places.
  • For pit bulls, an obligation to wear a muzzle in public places and sterilization.
Dangerous dogs will also be required to be kept behind a fence when at home.
To be labelled dangerous, a dog must have caused serious injuries to a person or an animal and have been evaluated by a veterinarian. 
However, the working group does recommend a ban on pit bulls for people who have committed certain types of crimes related to violence or cruelty to animals.

Ste-Adèle widens ban

Meanwhile, the town of Ste-Adèle has expanded its pit bull ban to include all dangerous dogs, regardless of breed.
The Laurentian town changed its rules when it hired the SPCA to handle animal control.
"People weren't identifying their pit bulls as pit bulls," mayor Robert Milot said. "In their pet licence they classified them as mix breeds, so there was way of controlling what kind of dogs they were."
Under the new system, a dog that attacks another person or animal will be evaluated by SPCA veterinarians. If it's deemed to be dangerous, it will be euthanized.
"We're hoping the [Quebec public security] minister will adopt a pit bull ban. That will take care of one type of breed," Milot said.
"In the meantime, we banned all types of dangerous dogs. We are more protected than were before."
Source..... cbc.ca/news

Friday 27 May 2016

Toronto’s pit bulls are almost gone. So why are there more dog bites than ever?


By 



The law stopped short of a total ban, at least in the short term, but went some distance in that direction. Under the law, four breeds (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 the bill’s passage.
It also became illegal to import them into the province. The four breeds are often referred to together as ‘pit bulls’.

“Over time, it will mean fewer pit bull attacks and, overall, fewer attacks by dangerous dogs,” then-attorney general Michael Bryant told the Ontario legislature in 2005.
Bryant did not respond to an interview request.
The law certainly succeeded in cutting bites by the four affected breeds — Toronto recorded only 19 in 2014, down from 112 in 2005.
It’s not surprising, since there are far fewer of them around to bite anyone — there were only 338 registered in Toronto in 2014, down from 1,411 in 2005. Also, since the dogs were supposed to be unable to breed starting in 2005, the remaining ones are becoming elderly. Gradually, they are dying off without being replaced. They should cease to exist in the city by 2020 or so, at least in theory.
That isn’t airtight — the Toronto Humane Society still sees the occasional pit bull puppy come in to its shelter, says spokesperson Tegan Buckingham.
What it hasn’t succeeded in doing is reducing the total number of dog bites (though it looked that way for a time). Toronto’s reported dog bites have been rising since 2012, and in 2013 and 2014 reached their highest levels this century, even as pit bulls and similar dogs neared local extinction.

Graphic: As pit bulls disappear, dog bites rise

Click here to view data »
When Ontario’s ban was being debated in 2004, opinions split between those who saw pit bulls as uniquely dangerous, and those who argued that any big dog could be very dangerous, if mistreated or trained to be violent.
“I’m not surprised at all by those statistics,” says Parkdale-High Park MPP Cheri DiNovo, an opponent of breed-specific bans. “I would think they were inevitable.”
DiNovo favours a system more like Calgary’s, where officials avoided breed-based bans while promoting education of dog owners and children, combined with enforcement. Bites in Calgary have dropped dramatically since the mid-1980s.

“The current law isn’t working, and thankfully we’re getting the stats to back that up. Anybody who’s been on this issue for a long time knows that it’s a predictable failure.”
Toronto’s dog bite statistics are based on reports that doctors who treat bites are required to file, says Mary Lou Leiher, a program manager at the city’s animal services department.
Bites from German shepherds (Toronto’s #4 dog, after Labradors, Shih Tzus and golden retrievers) were most common in 2004 and 2014. Bites from pit bulls and Staffordshires were less common in 2014 than ten years earlier, but bites from American bulldogs and boxers were more common.


160219_dog_table
The bites reflected in the data vary in seriousness:
“People are afraid that they are going to get a disease from being bitten by an animal, so it doesn’t have to be severe at all for them to go to the doctor,” Leiher explains.
The breed of the offending dog in the city bite data is based on what the owner, or a city investigator, says it is. There has been no procedural change in recent years that would cause there to be more bite reports out of proportion to actual bites, she said.

“We would love to see the pit bull ban lifted,” Buckingham says. “Of the ones that come into the shelter, the majority are the sweetest dogs.”
In the meantime, they are shipped to shelters in Quebec.
By 2012, the Ontario Veterinary Medical Association estimated that the law had led to over 1,000 dogs and puppies in Ontario having been needlessly put down.



Wednesday 27 April 2016

The Trouble With Banning Pit Bulls

00:37
02:21
NEWSY / DANNY MATTESON


Missouri legislators are considering restricting cities from imposing bans on certain dog breeds.
By Matt Moreno | April 27, 2016
"Pit bulls. I think there are kind of two sides of it. There's people who either don't really like pit bulls or people who really do like pit bulls. ... Just seeing a pit bull behind a glass cage sometimes people will back away and say, 'Oh my gosh. 
There's a pit bull. Let's walk by that,'" said Michelle Casey, assistant director of the Central Missouri Humane Society.
This is Michelle Casey, assistant director of the Central Missouri Humane Society in Columbia.
Right now, state legislators in Missouri are considering stripping cities of the power to impose "breed specific" dog bans, which usually have the biggest impact on pit bulls.
"People think of a pit bull, and they think of a really big, muscular, big-headed, really strong type of breed," Casey says. "But really, pit bulls genetically are supposed to be about 40 to 50 pounds. They're thinner, they're agile, they curl into little balls. We've kind of overbred them to become this kind of beast-like dog, and that is not at all what they're supposed to be in any way."
While Columbia, Missouri, doesn't have a citywide ban on pit bulls, dozens of neighborhoods within the city and a handful of surrounding cities do.
"Sometimes, we've got people who surrender their pit bulls because they have to move and can't find a place that will accept them," Casey says. "If we're at capacity and we have about 50 dogs on the adoption floor, ... we've had upwards of 30 to 40 percent of them being pit bulls."
The bans on breed-specific dogs is a national issue. And no matter the state, city or neighborhood, definitive and credible breed-specific statistics are tough to come by.
The National Canine Research Council says there is "no credible evidence" that certain breeds are more aggressive than others, and the American Veterinary Medical Association says controlled studies "have not identified [pit bulls] as disproportionately dangerous."
But according to DogsBite.org, a national dog bite victims' group, pit bulls contributed to 82 percent of the 34 dog-related deaths it recorded in 2015.
"In my experience, they are no more likely to bite than a chihuahua or a rat terrier is," Casey says. "Not once since I've been here have I ever been afraid of a pit bull or felt fearful of a pit bull at all. They're such loyal dogs; they want to please their people so much, so really bad people can train really good dogs to do bad things."


Wednesday 20 April 2016

Miami-Dade “pit bull” ban remains, despite overwhelming evidence of failure and county officials’ view


On August 14, 2012, 248,496 of Miami-Dade County’s 1.2 million registered voters (20%, or 202,637 people) went to the polls to decide if a 23-year-old ban on “pit bull” dogs would be repealed through a voter referendum. The outcome showed that 140,879 (63.2%) of participating voters opted to keep the ban in place, compared with 81,758 (36.8%) participating voters who wanted it repealed. [1]
Although the result was a disappointment for community safety advocates and dog-owners in South Florida, it underscores the need for fact-based, peer-reviewed information concerning animal behavior, the human-canine bond, and the kinds of ordinances proven to enhance public safety. Tragically for companion dogs and the people who love them, the outcome of the August 14 primary shows the extent to which taxpayers of Miami-Dade County continue to be misled by fear-based, outdated reports resulting in the continuance of costly regulations that do not produce safe, humane communities.
An American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) analysis of 40 years of the controlled study of dog bites does not identify “pit bull” dogs as disproportionately dangerous. [2] Animal experts agree that it is human beings (i.e., the owners) who are responsible for the humane care, custody, and control of their dogs, and who have an obligation to their pets and to their fellow community members. 
Yet, because of the ban on “pit bull” dogs, the taxpayers of Miami-Dade County have spent the past 23 years living in fear of any dog they believed was a “pit bull.”  It is no surprise – nor fault – that their voting reflects this confusion. Unlike the rest of the State of Florida, which enacted a law in 1989 prohibiting regulation of dogs based on breed, presumed breed, or appearance, the taxpayers in Miami-Dade were grandfathered into an antiquated system where a dog’s appearance was falsely assumed to predict behavior, despite ample scientific evidence to the contrary.
The knowledgeable official charged with enforcing the animal ordinances and protecting the public. Director of Miami-Dade Animal Services Alex Munoz, told the Miami Herald on August 15, 2012: “If you asked me if there was a predominance of pit bull bites versus other dogs, we don’t see a predominance of pit bull bites…because they’re no different from any other dog”. [3] Miami-Dade’s Operations and Enforcement Chief, Kathleen Labrada, also told the Miami Herald on August 4, 2012: “Even the pits that Animal Services picks up as strays are “sociable’.” [4]
In perhaps the most revealing indication of the official view of these “outlawed” dogs, Director Munoz issued a press release after the election stating that while the “Miami-Dade County Animal Services Department respects the will of the electorate and its decision … the department will continue to work with rescue organizations and adopters to find new life-long homes for ‘Pit Bulls’ outside of Miami-Dade County.” [5]
Breed specific regulation has never enhanced community safety wherever it has been implemented in North America or Europe, including Miami-Dade County. In an era of national economic turmoil, particularly in devastated regions of the southern United States, taxpayers deserve to know that their hard-earned dollars have been directed towards costly measures that have failed to enhance public safety while devastating responsible, law-abiding citizens.
As of 2012, the overwhelming trend has been to repeal or reject laws that target dog owners and their pets based on breed, presumed breed, or appearance. At the same time that Miami-Dade voters went to the polls, the American Bar Association (ABA) House of Delegates passed a resolution urging jurisdictions in the United States to repeal any and all breed specific regulations. [6] An increasing number of political leaders – from both political parties, conservatives and liberals alike – have recognized the successful track-record of breed-neutral responsible dog ownership laws. The Miami-Dade community deserves to benefit from the experiences of responsible dog ownership communities around the country.
It will take time to undo the disservice decades of hysteria and misinformation surrounding “pit bull” dogs have done to the dogs themselves. Animal professionals, animal welfare organizations, safety officials, dog owners, and the media have a responsibility to seek out and alert citizens to the most up-to-date, reliable research on dogs and to recognize the human responsibility for the human-canine bond, so that fewer communities  suffer the consequences of ineffective laws that penalize taxpayers, dog owners, and government agencies.
SOURCES & NOTES:
[1] Miami-Dade County Primary Election Results. (14 August 2012). Retrieved from: http://results.enr.clarityelections.com/FL/Dade/40545/96726/en/summary.html
[2] AVMA Animal Welfare Division. (17 April 2012). The Welfare Implications of the Role of Breed in Dog Bite Risk and Prevention. Retrieved from: https://www.avma.org/KB/Resources/Backgrounders/Pages/The-Role-of-Breed-in-Dog-Bite-Risk-and-Prevention.aspx
[3] Associated Press. (15 August 2012). Vote keeps Miami-Dade pit bull ban in place. Retrieved from: http://www2.tbo.com/news/breaking-news/2012/aug/15/vote-keeps-miami-dade-pit-bull-ban-in-place-ar-465139/
[4] Brecher, Eleanor. (4 August 2012). Miami-Dade set to vote on repeal of pit bul ban.” The Miami Herald. Retrieved from: http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/08/04/2932192/miami-dade-set-to-vote-on-repeal.html
[5] Miami-Dade County. (15 August 2012).  Miami-Dade Animal Services Department Director Alex Munoz’ Statement on Repeal of County’s Pit Bull Dog Ban. [Press Release]. Retrieved from: http://www.miamidade.gov/animals/releases/2012-08-15-put-bull-ban.asp
[6] See NCRC’s Whitepaper regarding ABA Resolution 100, “American Bar Association Urges Repeal of All Breed-specific Laws.”