Answers About Dangerous Dogs

By THE NEW YORK TIMES
July 3, 2008, 10:06 am

Adam Goldfarb
A 90-year-old Staten Island man was critically injured after two pit
bulls attacked him. Following are a set of responses to readers’
questions about dangerous dogs from Adam Goldfarb, an issues
specialist for companion-care animals at the Humane Society of the
United States.

Read Mr. Goldfarb’s biography.
http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/02/ask-about-dangerous-dogs/

Q - I, too, own a Rottweiler, and she (her name is Jordan) is a sweet
pussy cat, especially around children. But that’s because we had her
around family and friends from the second we got her and got her
fixed as soon as we were able to.
We take her on walks, but when we are not home, she is IN THE
HOUSE. Not in the yard, not on a chain. The fact that these pits
were allowed to roam free blows my mind.
— Posted by Gina

A - You’ve brought up some really excellent points that are actually
supported by statistics. According to the National Canine Research
Council, there are 3 main factors that contribute to creating
dangerous dogs and at least 1 of these 3 factors was present
in over 90% of fatal dog attacks over the last 3 years. The 3
factors are:
The dog is not spayed or neutered.
The dog is not properly cared for (for example, the dog is abused,
neglected, chained, or allowed to roam).
The dog is not kept as a family pet (but instead as a guard dog,
status symbol, “yard dog,” etc.).
It’s great to hear that your dog is sterilized, well cared for, and lives as
a member of the family. You’re definitely doing things right.

As a bonus, you mentioned exposing her to lots of different people –
also known as socialization. I don’t think it’s possible to understate the
importance of early and regular socialization. By exposing dogs
(especially puppies) to new people and experiences, their owners
allow them to be safe and confident in a variety of situations.

Q - In Ontario, where I live, anti-pit bull legislation has been the law
for the last few years. Purchase of pit bull and similar (?) breeds is
forbidden. The existing dogs are to be muzzled in public. What
effect do you think muzzling has on well behaved animals? Could
it be deleterious? What do you think of blanket legislation like
Ontario’s?
— Posted by Muzzle Some Owners

A - The effects of the muzzle will depend on the dog, the owner, the
way that the muzzle is introduced, and the dog’s experiences
while wearing the muzzle. If the muzzle is introduced in a positive
way and the dog doesn’t have any negative experiences while
muzzled, there aren’t likely to be problems. But if the muzzle is
uncomfortable, is forced on the dog, or if the dog is attacked
while wearing a muzzle, issues could certainly develop.

The Humane Society of the United States opposes breed bans
like those enacted in Ontario, Denver, and too many other
communities. Breed bans unfairly impact responsible owners
and fail to address the root causes of many dog attacks—
namely, irresponsible owner behaviors such as abuse, neglect,
and aggression training. Additionally, breed bans are
ineffective and expensive.

Communities that want to address dangerous dog issues are far
better equipped to do so through breed-neutral dangerous dog
laws, well-funded animal care and control agencies, strong
humane education programs, and subsidized, mobile
sterilization services.

Q - I recently rescued a dog, a chow, that had been abandoned
and chained to the lamppost on my corner, while tied there had
been attacked by another dog. We took him to animal emergency
room, got him stitches and brought him home. While getting him
out of the taxi my boyfriend pushed him and he turned around
and bite my boyfriend. I have two questions about this experience:
What sort of recourse is there/what sort of action should be taken
when a dog attacks another dog?
When we told people that the dog had bit my boyfriend, albeit after
a long and stressful day for it, many people told us we should have
it put down. Is this true? We decided not to (it hasn’t done anything
like that since and is in our house waiting to be adopted) but is
this standard? That when a dog bites someone it is to be put down?
— Posted by M

A - Thank you so much for helping a needy dog near your home. It
sounds like you really went above and beyond.

To answer your first question, every community has different laws
about dog-on-dog attacks. In some cases, a dog may be declared
dangerous for attacking another dog and you’re required to report
such incidents to local law enforcement. In other cases, laws don’t
address the issue at all. Check with your local animal control office
to find out more about your local and state animal laws.

With regard to the recent dog bite, keep in mind that there were
many factors in play: this dog was abandoned, tied to a lamppost,
attacked by another dog, rescued by total strangers, and taken to a
veterinarian. That’s a rough day for any dog.

A single bite in any situation doesn’t necessarily warrant euthanasia,
but it shouldn’t be ignored either. Consider the severity of the bite,
the circumstances, and the dog’s history. If you do choose to keep
a dog who has bitten someone, you’ll have to be extremely vigilant
with that dog, watching for subtle (and not-so-subtle) indications
of stress. Also, I’d strongly recommend consulting with a
veterinarian, behaviorist, trainer, or other professional in the field.

Q - I’ve read Mr. Goldfarb’s advice that one should judge individual
dogs, not entire breeds. And it seems to me there has always been
one breed or another – the German Shepherd, the Doberman pinscher –
that had the sort of reputation for vicious attacks that the Pit Bull
does today. I remember the “Spanky and Our Gang,” a popular series
of short films for children, had a Pit Bull as its mascot. He seemed
as friendly and harmless as his human companions.
But because I live near a New York City housing project where Pit
Bulls, gold chains and designer sports attire are status symbols,
all that reasonable, rational talk seems naive, especially in light
of persistent reports of unprovoked attacks. Whether these dogs
are trained to be vicious, or simply mistreated, they’re scary and
menacing. I will go out of my way to avoid being anywhere near one.
Why are some breeds seemingly more prone to be vicious–or
more easily trained to become that way?
— Posted by bencharif

A - You’re absolutely right that there’s always one breed of dog
that is regarded (and stigmatized) as the dangerous dog du jour.
As long as there are people who acquire dogs as status symbols,
guard dogs, or use them for fighting, communities will always
have problems with dangerous dogs.

I don’t believe that any breed is more prone to being vicious.
However, pit bulls, rottweilers, German shepherds, and Doberman
pinschers are all extremely intelligent, athletic dogs; they typically
take to training very well. Pit bulls especially crave training
because it provides the stimulation and interaction with people
that they love so much. When these dogs are properly trained
and socialized by caring, responsible owners, they’ll be great
pets. But if they’re trained by people who want them to be
aggressive, they may respond to that training as well.

In the 1800’s, breeds like Newfoundlands and bloodhounds
were the dangerous dogs of their day, but they’re rarely considered
that way today. Like other fads, the popularity of dog breeds waxes
and wanes and I’m confident that pit bulls will eventually fade
away from the spotlight as new breeds take their place.

For more information on the history of dangerous dogs in
the United States, read “The Pit Bull Placebo,” by Karen Delise.

Q - What is the humane society doing to stop dogfighting
and breeding/training of dogs for dogfights in NY? I am in
constant fear of walking my dog in my community here in
Prospect Lefferts.
— Posted by James Greenblum

A - The indictment last year of Michael Vick brought animal
fighting to the forefront of the national consciousness. In the
last year we’ve worked with elected officials, law enforcement
agencies, and humane professionals to crackdown on the
criminals who would engage in these barbaric activities. 12
states have upgraded their penalties for animal fighting (including
Wyoming and Idaho, making dogfighting a felony in all 50 states)
and there’s currently a bill in the New York State Assembly
(S.6429/A.9421) which both increases the penalties for dogfighting
and makes attending a dogfight a felony.

Across the country, arrests for dogfighting have tripled. To
continue this success, the Humane Society of the United States
is offering a $5,000 reward for information leading to the arrest
and conviction of dogfighters. We’ve paid out 17 of these rewards
and 6 more are pending.

If you’d like to get involved in New York (or elsewhere), we’re
holding seminars, activist meetings, and lobbying days in
the near future. Visit humanesociety.org/join to sign up for alerts.

Q - There is no evidence that it is the “nature” of the breed that
makes the dog violent.
The violent reputation of Pit Bulls (or any other breed, for that
matter) is nothing more than an accident of history that becomes
a self-perpetuating cycle:
irresponsible owners looking for a “tough” breed of dog are drawn
to Pit Bulls because of their reputation as a violent breed…
which causes pit bulls to be owned disproportionately by people
who do not train or handle them properly…
which in turn causes pit bulls to be disproportionately involved
in violent attacks…
which in turn feeds their reputation as a violent breed…
and the cycle continues. It has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with
the actual nature of the breed.
— Posted by Joel

A - You’ve summed up this issue very well, but there are other
factors that serve to further complicate the challenges facing pit
bulls and pit bull advocates.

Right now pit bulls are filling up animal shelters, especially those
in large urban areas. Many potential adopters aren’t interested in
pit bulls—or are scared away from adopting them—because of
the dogs’ poor public image. Those who are interested in pit
bulls are often unable to adopt them because their homeowner’s
insurance company will cancel their policy, or if they’re renters,
they’re unable to find a rental property that will allow them to
have a pit bull.

Corporate policies that blacklist pit bulls add to their poor public
image and act as an endorsement of like-minded legislation.
Every company has a right to make its own policies, but by
turning away responsible dog owners, these companies are
missing out on valuable customers.

Q - We are reading and hearing so much more about dog
chaining. Is there more of this behavior occuring, is there
more media coverage because it sells newspapers or builds
viewer, or is the Humane Society of the United States just
more aggressive in its involvement in this issue?
— Posted by Barry

A - A dog’s life should consist of more than just a heavy
chain and a broken down doghouse. Dogs are social animals
who have been bred to form strong attachments to their
human families and studies have shown that chained dogs
are at a greater risk to bite. The Humane Society of the
United States has been more aggressive in addressing the
issue of dog chaining, but progress on this issue has been
aided by other local and national groups that focus exclusively
on chaining, such as Dogs Deserve Better.

Also, the television show “Animal Precinct” on Animal Planet
has contributed to public awareness about chaining. Nearly
every episode features a neglected, chained dog who is
rescued by a humane officer. “Animal Precinct” has done a
great job illustrating the debilitating effects that long-term
chaining has on dogs.

For New Yorkers who would like to help chained dogs, there
are currently bills to limit the practice of chaining dogs
pending in both New York City and New York State (No. 545
and A.6553/S.2052 respectively). Learn more about this issue at humanesociety.org/chaining.

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/03/answers-about-dangerous-dogs/

Posted on SHARE Yahoo group - July 4, 2008