DOG ATTACKS

Fatal dog attacks in the United States From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia This article contains an incomplete list(s), which may never be able to satisfy particular standards for completeness. You can help by expanding the list(s) with reliably sourced entries. Fatal dog attack scenarios include escaped guard dogs and children wandering into their territory. Fatal dog attacks in the United States are a small percentage of the relatively common occurrences of dog bites. While at least 4.5 – 4.7 million Americans (2%) are bitten by dogs every year, only about 0.0002% of these (less than 0.00001% of the U.S. population) result in death, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which published a special report on the subject in 2000.[1] The second part of this article consists of an annotated list of individual U.S. dog-attack fatalities. The list is not meant to be exhaustive nor conclusive. It relies mostly on news reports as references, but at points it runs concurrent with studies reviewed in the first part and may include information from the studies at those points. Care has been and should continue to be taken that this information is verifiable in the sources and that any contradictions or other indications that the information might not be valid are addressed reasonably. Nevertheless, the reader should bear in mind that data from news investigations is generally less reliable than information from published scholarly studies, and that where specific breeds listed, they are rarely based on conclusive proof of ancestry. The tables that follow the list summarize the data from the list by age group of victim(s), and by category of dog(s) involved. In addition to the main list, it is also important to ensure the continued accuracy of these two tables.

MEDIA BIAS

 Fatal dog attacks are always media sensations and heavily reported. Yet we can only trust that 60% of the reports of breed identification from the media and involved animal control officials are accurate. And unfortunately, it is media reports rather than facts that spur the political decisions that lead to breed specific legislation. Based on this study, 20 breeds and 2 mixed breeds should face legislation rather than the few that are presently targeted. The ugly truth about this study is that it points to human behavior as the cause of dog attacks on humans. Social responsibility cannot be legislated. Many of these dog owners had histories of animal mismanagement, yet the penalties or consequences were inadequate to change the behavior. It would have been interesting if the study had also looked at previous behaviors and histories of the parents of the young victims. Whether programs for responsible pet ownership, bite prevention education, or dog related parent supervision education are widely effective has yet to be proven. Certainly breed specific legislation is not the answer. A recent Canadian study showed that there were no significant differences in the number of bite related hospital visits before and after communities adopted breed specific legislation. Dr. Ken Tudor

EXCUSES FOR SOME BREEDS BEHAVIOR

Rottweilers . . . seem to show up disproportionately often in the mauling, killing, and maiming statistics simply because they are both quite popular and very powerful . . . Clifton excuses Rottweilers’ attacks due to the fact that they are both popular and powerful. Yet pit bulls, who are also popular and strong, are not given this same excuse. In the German shepherd mauling, killing, and maiming cases I have recorded, there have almost always been circumstances of duress: the dog was deranged from being kept alone on a chain for prolonged periods without human contract, was starving, was otherwise severely abused, was protecting puppies, or was part of a pack including other dangerous dogs. None of the German shepherd attacks have involved predatory behavior on the part of an otherwise healthy dog. [sic] Here Clifton excuses German Shepherd attacks due to outside factors. This implies that no other type of dog in his study attacked because it was left neglected, abused, chained or left untrained and unsocialized. Yet he offersno proof to substantiate the idea that all other cases he recorded involved trained, socialized, beloved family pets. [I]t is sheer foolishness to encourage people to regard pit bull terriers and Rottweilers as just dogs like any other, no matter how much they may behave like other dogs under ordinary circumstances. Clifton implies that pit bulls and Rottweilers no longer behave like dogs under extra-ordinary circumstances. What those extra-ordinary circumstances are is unstated, and how pit bulls and Rottweilers suddenly become behaviorally different under those circumstances is not demonstrated in the report. To imply that pit bulls and Rottweilers are not to be regarded as dogs even though they act like ordinary canines is absurd. Clifton’s agenda is quite clear—he badly wishes to portray pit bulls and Rottweilers as somehow unique—but his “study” is so flawed that he cannot prove any of his sweeping generalizations. Temperament is not the issue, nor is it even relevant. What is relevant is actuarial risk. Here Clifton returns to the idea that, somehow, we can calculate the “riskiness” or “relative danger” of particular breeds or types of dogs. As demonstrated earlier in this article, it is not possible to do this. Furthermore, it is totally bizarre to say that temperament is not an issue. Temperament plays a huge part in dog attacks, as any canine behaviorist or dog bite researcher would agree. A very large dog may be able to do a lot of damage if it bites someone, but if the dog is extremely placid by nature (temperament), there’s very little danger to the public. On the contrary, a smaller dog may do less damage if it attacks, but if it is extremely aggressive, it could maul or kill someone. To suggest that temperament isn’t even relevant is ridiculous. If almost any other dog has a bad moment, someone may get bitten, but will not be maimed for life or killed, and the actuarial risk is accordingly reasonable. If a pit bull terrier or a Rottweiler has a bad moment, often someone is maimed or killed—and that has now created off-the-chart actuarial risk, for which the dogs as well as their victims are paying the price. Clifton’s own “study” disproves his assertions. His own tally of severe and fatal dog attacks includes over 50 different types and breeds of dogs. It seems clear that dogs of all types can have “bad moments” that result in severe injury.

CANINE GENETICS AND BEHAVIOR

By Glen Bui,

American Canine Foundation

“To state that a breed of dog is aggressive is scientifically impossible. Statistics do not support such a finding. Dogs have been domesticated for thousands of years and within all breeds there can be dangerous dogs because of owner issues such as training the dog to attack, lack of training and socialization. There is no such thing as the “Mean Gene” in dogs as well as in people. However, mutant genes have been discovered. Alteration of a single DNA base in the gene encoding an enzyme called monoamine oxidase A (MAOA) has been found to render the enzyme nonfunctional. This enzyme normally catalyzes reactions that metabolize the neurotransmitters dopamine, serotonin, and oradrenaline. What this does is cause slight mental impairment which interferes with the ability to cope with certain situations resulting in aggression. There is no proof and there never has been that the American Pit Bull Terrier possesses mutant genes. There is a one in ten thousand chance of a mutant gene appearing in a population. Aggressiveness has many definitions and its stimulus of the environment that causes behavior. Dogs defend territory, they exhibit dominance and if allowed can become protective of their family. All this behavior can be controlled by the owner and aggression is mainly an act of behavior. To make claim that the American Pit Bull Terrier can cause more severe injury than other breeds is ludicrous. Over 30 breeds of dogs are responsible for over 500 fatal attacks in the last 30 years, every victim was severely injured. The American Pit Bull Terrier is clearly a useful member of society. The breed was World War One Hero and it’s rated as having one of the best overall temperaments in the United States (A.T.T.S.). The breed is used for dog show competitions, therapy, service work, search and rescue, police work and companionship. Man has domesticated dogs to the point they serve as companions, workers and even objects of beauty. Dogs will protect man, see for him, hunt for him and play. One breed is not more inherently good or evil, vicious, harmful or helpful. It is man who is responsible for the dog’s behavior, not the breed of dog. Those passing breed bans fail to understand that a mis-trained Pit Bull can be replaced with another breed. People determine whether dogs will be useful members of a community or a nuisance. It is the people who allow their dogs to become dangerous and legislators must control and punish the people.”