16.5.2. Can You Identify The “Pit Bulls”?
Note: the “Top Responses” are those of shelter workers and veterinarians, i.e., “experts”.
DNA and Survey Results: What Kind of Dog is That?
All photographs in the following survey are
by Michael Crandall.
Put your cursor inside the frame and scroll down
and sideways to view all of the information.
So, how many “Pit Bulls” are in the preceding 119 photographs?
Answer: None, zero, zilch! There are 3 “purebreds” and 116 “mixed breeds” or more commonly referred to as “mutts”, but no “Pit Bulls”.
At http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S109002331500310X, a study entitled “Inconsistent identification of pit bull-type dogs by shelter staff” by K.R. Olson, J.K. Levy, B. Norby, M.M. Crandall, J.E. Broadhurst, S. Jacks, R.C. Barton, M.S. Zimmerman of Maddie’s Shelter Medicine Program, Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Florida, Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Michigan State University, Jacksonville Humane Society, Jacksonville Animal Care and Protective Services, Tallahassee Animal Services and Marion County Animal Services, Ocala it is stated,
“Guessed breed designations are often included in veterinary records, dog licenses, animal shelter records, pet adoption websites, lost-and-found notices, housing applications, and insurance policies (Voith et al., 2013). Visual breed assessments have been shown to be erroneous more frequently than not1 (Voith et al, 2009 and Voith et al, 2013). The past few decades have seen an increase in ownership restrictions applied to certain breeds of dogs and dogs that resemble them. The restrictions are based on the assumptions that certain breeds are inherently dangerous, that those breeds can be reliably identified, and that restricting these breeds would improve public safety.
When dogs bite people and other animals, the suspected breed of dog reported by witnesses is often listed in official bite reports filed by hospitals or animal control facilities.1 Media coverage of dog bite-related injuries has been shown to be more extensive and to report the suspected breed more frequently when witnesses report a pit bull or guard-line breed as involved.2 The sources and reliability of this breed reporting have been questioned (Collier, 2006, Patronek, Slavinski, 2009, Voith et al, 2009, Voith et al, 2013, Patronek et al, 2010 and Patronek et al, 2013).
A study of all dog bite-related fatalities that occurred during the 10-year period 2000–2009 reported that 90% of the dogs involved were described in at least one media account with a single breed descriptor, potentially implying that the dog was purebred (Patronek et al., 2013). However, approximately 46% of the dogs in the US are mixed breed dogs (American Veterinary Medical Association, 2012), and it seemed unlikely to the authors that purebred dogs would be disproportionately represented among the dogs involved in these incidents. Further, in only 18% of the cases were the authors able to make a valid determination that the dog involved was a member of a distinct, recognized breed (Patronek et al., 2013). Nevertheless, unverified reports of the dog breeds involved in serious and fatal incidents have been used to develop opinions regarding perceived danger levels of different breeds1 (Voith et al, 2009, Voith et al, 2013 and Patronek et al, 2013).
‘Pit bull’ is not a recognized breed, but a term applied to a heterogeneous group whose membership may include purebred dogs of various breeds, along with dogs presumed to be mixes of those breeds. Use of this descriptor varies according to the recognized breeds included and the opinions of the observers (Patronek et al., 2013). Nevertheless, dog owners, animal shelters, insurance companies, veterinarians, and the public frequently use the term ‘pit bull’ casually and in official documents, as though it describes a single, recognized breed. The lack of a universally accepted definition of ‘pit bull’ and reliance upon the opinion of observers complicate identification of dogs targeted for regulatory control by ‘breed bans’ (Hoffman et al., 2014). Most, but not all, breed-specific ordinances in the US include with the term ‘pit bull’ the American pit bull terrier, American Staffordshire terrier, and Staffordshire bull terrier, along with dogs that, based upon their appearance, are deemed to resemble these breeds.
Since actual pedigree information is not usually available, determining the likely breed of dogs that may fall under breed-based restrictions requires a subjective assessment of the dog’s appearance. Recently, DNA analysis has been used to investigate the breed heritage of individual dogs targeted in breed restriction cases. However, the largest testing service does not offer a DNA test for identification of American pit bull terriers. Additionally, it does not provide a test for ‘pit bulls’, since the term variously refers to a loose collection of breeds and their mixes or to dogs with similar morphology rather than a group of dogs with a controlled gene pool.
Shelter staff members and veterinarians routinely make subjective breed assessments as part of daily shelter operations. They also may be tasked with providing expert opinions regarding the likely breed of individual dogs involved in breed regulation cases. Depending upon the regulatory environment and/or the beliefs of shelter managers, the stakes may be high for dogs identified as pit bulls and for their owners3 (Voith et al., 2009).
The primary objective of this study was to determine the level of agreement among shelter workers in designating pit bull-type breeds for shelter dogs. A secondary objective was to compare shelter workers’ breed assignments with DNA breed signatures.”
and
“Conclusions
The marked lack of agreement observed among shelter staff members in categorizing the breeds of shelter dogs illustrates that reliable inclusion or exclusion of dogs as ‘pit bulls’ is not possible, even by experts. This has special significance to the topic of restrictive breed regulations, since such regulations are based on the faulty assumptions that (1) certain breeds or phenotypes are inherently dangerous, and (2) that those breeds and their mixes can be identified by observation. Since injuries from dogs have not decreased following bans on particular breeds, public safety is better served by focusing on recognition and mitigation of risk factors for dog bites, such as supervising children, recognizing canine body language, avoiding approaching an unfamiliar dog in its territory, neutering dogs, and providing adequate socialization and companionship for dogs and identification and management of individual dangerous dogs and reckless dog owners.”
The following photographs are of some of the dogs in the preceding study and the identities ascribed by the various “experts” and by DNA.
Put your cursor inside the frame and scroll down
and sideways to view all of the information.
At http://www.ava.com.au/policy/614-breed-specific-legislation, the Australia Veterinary Association states,
“Breed on its own is not an effective indicator or predictor of aggression in dogs. 4, 5, 6
It is not possible to determine precisely the breed of the types of dogs targeted by breed-specific legislation by appearance or by DNA analysis. 4, 5”
Responsible owners of “Pit Bulls” contend that it is not the dog, but the way the dog is trained and socialized that will determine how the dog is going to behave – See http://pitbullsfactormyth.net/7-2-it-is-not-the-breed-of-dog-but-how-it-is-raised/. Opponents, who for the most part have never owned, had any first-hand experience with and/or have trained and socialized “Pit Bulls” claim that the dogs are aggressive, vicious, dangerous, etc.
There is no doubt that dog attacks occur. However, are all of the attacks attributed to so-called “Pit Bulls” actually by “Pit Bulls”? I don’t think so. See http://pitbullsfactormyth.net/16-5-1-breed-identification/
According to those who have studied the subject of identifying dogs by their appearance, the consensus is that identification based on appearance is unreliable even when done by persons who are supposed to know like veterinarians, shelter and pound workers, etc., i.e., the “experts”. See http://pitbullsfactormyth.net/16-5-1-breed-identification/ Consequently, if the experts’ identification is unreliable, how valid is identification by the public or non-experts?
The following is a photo of a dog that was allowed by its owner to run at large and charge at us almost every time we walked by the owner’s home (at least 8 to 10 times per week) even though we were on the opposite side of the street next to the curb.
Put your cursor inside the frame and scroll down
and sideways to view all of the information.
The dog was a Labrador Retriever who allegedly bit an elderly lady who was walking by. Duke was a pain in the neck, but he was never aggressive with us. Nevertheless, the following Animal Control report incorrectly indicates that the dog was
“DUKE 2Y LARGE DOG BLACK M PIT BULL”
and
“Weight: 65.00”
The little dog in the background is still running across the street and barking at us every time he sees us, and the owners are still not doing anything about it. We assume that he will also come to a tragic end like Duke.
In my opinion, these are the types of people who should not have any animals.
Part of the Houston Animal Control report follows.
Put your cursor inside the frame and scroll down
and sideways to view all of the information.
On Thursday, May 22, 2014, my wife and our Boxer–Shar-Pei mix dog (“Rusty”) were “attacked” by two (2) large dogs.
The incident occurred on Tenneco Drive at the corner of Hunting Brook Drive. The incident was observed by an Inspector with the City of Houston. She followed the dogs to their home at 10426 Tenneco Drive and the following information was provided to us. The inspector said the dogs were “Pit Bulls”.
Put your cursor inside the frame and scroll down
and sideways to view all of the information.
I had a long conversation with the owner of the dogs, and was assured that the dogs would no longer be allowed out of his home unless they were on leashes. In addition, the owner and I agreed that the dogs are mutts and NOT “Pit Bulls”.
The dogs did not “attack” but were merely running up to “check out” our dog, Rusty.
However, the reactions of everyone who witnessed the incident were reasonable when they see two dogs running toward a human who in this case happened to have a dog with her. However, it does demonstrate the misinformation that is common in such cases, i.e., the dogs were NOT “Pit Bulls”, and they were not “attacking”: they were merely being dogs. The fault as usual is with the owner who allowed the dogs to run at large even though it was for only a short period of time.
After our conversation, the owner understood that if he truly cares for his dogs he should NEVER allow the dogs to run at large even for a few minutes. Since the date of this incident through the time of their deaths, the dogs were never again seen running at large.
You have already seen in this document many photos of dogs that are routinely and incorrectly referred to as “Pit Bulls”. More photos will follow and all photos are suppose to be “Pit Bulls”. Decide for yourself if you agree with the labels?
If you read the studies that have been done on dog attack fatalities and injuries, you will find that the studies are for the most part based on newspaper and other media accounts and on identification by the public, including owners of the dogs who were guilty of the misadventures, police, medical workers, animal control personnel, etc. In addition, the reports state that the term “Pit Bull” and/or “Pit Bull” type includes more than one breed of dog. However, when the studies are being quoted these facts are never stated. So, should anyone rely on the results of these studies? I don’t think so.
If the breed of the dog could be reliably established, then how many attacks were actually done by any one breed of dogs? It would be good to know, but unfortunately, at the present time, there is no way to accurately and reliably determine the breed of any dog.
DNA profiling can establish whether a dog is the descendant of a particular male (Sire) and female (Dam), i.e., its parents, but that assumes that you have the Sire and Dam available to do the profiling.
DNA profiling can verify parentage, but it cannot determine the breed.
The breed is still pretty much left to the person claiming that a dog is of a particular breed. However, keep in mind that breed is significant if one is trying to sell the animal for more money, and when money is in the equation, people will not always be honest and truthful.
So, are “Pit Bulls” a real breed? I don’t think so and neither do the scientists whose studies I have researched.
Are they worth any more money than any other dog? To me they are not, but there are a lot of people who will pay for something they believe is “special”. Keep in mind that people stay in lines outside Apple stores for their newest phones, or for Michael Jordan sneakers for which some people have killed for a pair, or a Ferrari when a Toyota will probably get you where you want to go in about the same amount of time and for a lot less money, etc.
However, if you are the one selling the object, you are interested in getting the highest price, and if you can make a prospective purchaser think your items are “special”, that consumer may be willing to pay more money especially if the consumer knows little or nothing about what he is buying.
So, do “Pit Bulls” attack more people than any other breed? I seriously doubt it!
