19.0. Why Do “Pit Bulls” Have Such A Bad Reputation?
On the news on a certain channel in Houston on Friday, January 31, 2014, a video showed Animal Control taking a tranquilized dog into custody. The report said it was a “Pit Bull”. The fact is that it did not even have a slight resemblance to a “Pit Bull”, but it did look like a “Bandog”.
http://www.khou.com/news/local/Elusive-pit-bull-keeps-police-busy-near-Gulf-Freeway-243015131.html
Real “facts” don’t seem to matter to the media: sensationalism does.
Note: the link was broken on April 1, 2018 and is no longer available.
In the summer of 2013, a 62 year old woman was killed by a dog in Channelview, Dayton or one of those small towns. I don’t remember the name. One television “news” report identified the dog as a “Pit Bull”: however, another channel had the officer that investigated the incident, and the officer stated that he saw the dog run into the woods adjacent to the victim’s home. The officer identified the dog as a Labrador Retriever.
Earlier in 2013, a reporter and video crew were at a home in Katy. The elderly owner was complaining about “2 vicious Pit Bulls” in the neighbors’ back yard. He said that the dogs were destroying the fence and trying to get into his back yard. He was afraid they would attack him and his family.
The video showed the fence that was very old and weathered. One (1) picket was not attached at the top rail, and consequently, the picket was leaning toward the old man’s back yard. It was large enough for a dog to stick its head through. The fence looked like it was old enough so that it would be very easy for someone or something to lean up against it and push a board out from the rail.
As strong as most dogs are, if they wanted to get into the old man’s yard, they could have, given the condition of the fence. Additionally, the boards on the fence were nailed from the old man’s side of the fence. Consequently, if the boards were falling off, the fault was with the old man who was not re-nailing or screwing the boards back onto the rails.
However, the largest fallacy in the report was that the “vicious Pit Bulls” were actually German Shepherds.
Of all the videos of “dog attacks” that have aired in the last 15 or 20 years, I have yet to see one video that involved what I would have called a “Pit Bull” who looks like the “Pit Bulls” from fifty years ago. What I have seen are dogs that were of other breeds, but not “Pit Bulls”, or “mutts”, i.e., dogs that do not have any characteristics that could be identified with any particular breed of dog. Basically, dogs that resulted from dogs of mixed breeds breeding with dogs of other mixed breeds breeding with dogs of other mixed breeds breeding with dogs of other mixed breeds, etc.
On June 13, 2014, a neighbor reported to BARC that a dog allegedly “growled” at the neighbor’s wife. The dog had not bitten anyone. The dog was pinned in the neighbor’s back yard until BARC picked it up.
The dog had been in the neighborhood for a few days and had been staying in another neighbor’s front yard and barked at everyone, but had not shown any aggression. It appeared to have recently had a litter of puppies. The dog was a Catahoula and not a “Pit Bull” in spite of the homeowner’s, police and BARC’s labeling it as a “Pit Bull”.
The following are taken from various media sources from around the country. I did a Google search on “Pit Bull Attacks”, and the following are the first media reports found with photographs that I could copy and paste to this document.
They are, in my experience, typical of “Pit Bull attack reports” and a few of the countless similar reports that have led to and continue to inflame the public’s negative attitudes toward so-called “Pit Bulls”.
The significance of these erroneous reports will only make sense if you read this entire document because this document goes into a lot of detail on what is a “breed”, how to determine a dog’s breed, and I can only assume that it can only lead to the conclusion that the “Pit Bull” as a “breed” does not now nor has it ever existed. The American Kennel Club and all major international kennel clubs have also come to the same conclusion, and that is why they do NOT register so-called “Pit Bulls”.
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-jurupa-valley-pitbull-attack-20141105-story.html
In Thursday, November 6, 2014 Los Angeles Times
Family dog rips off Jurupa Valley toddler’s ear
http://www.inquisitr.com/1589905/kim-richards-pit-bull-attacks-niece/
Posted in: Celebrity News Posted: November 6, 2014 of Inquisitr
Kim Richards’ Pit Bull Viciously Attacks Niece, Decides To Keep The Dog
The (Wilmington, Del.) News Journal October 6, 2014
Girl recovering from Pit Bull attack: ‘Am I dead?’
http://www.pe.com/articles/pit-752409-attack-bull.html
Published: Oct. 20, 2014 in The Press Enterprise
VALLE VISTA: Pit Bull attack hospitalizes woman
Pitbull euthanized after attacking Clearfield boy
The Salt Lake Tribune on November 6, 2014
and
Opposing Views on November 6, 2014
Pit Bull Rescued from Animal Shelter Attacks 5-Year-Old Boy 2 Weeks After Adoption
Note: the link was broken on January 2, 2017 and is no longer available.
In Design Trend on October 28, 2014
Connecticut Man Rapes Pitbull: Says ISIS Made Him Do It – Neighbors Fire Gun
Note: the link was broken on March 25, 2018 and is no longer available.
http://www.salon.com/2013/02/05/in_defense_of_the_pitbull_partner
In Salon on Tuesday, February 5, 2013
In defense of the Pit Bull
The public, pet owners, police, medical workers, animal control personnel and so-called “experts” call just about everything a “Pit Bull”. In addition, the media sensationalizes every dog incident and incorrectly, in most cases, ascribes them to “Pit Bulls”.
If most dogs in the world are not “breeds”, then they are “mutts”. If a large segment of those mutts are incorrectly identified as “Pit Bulls”, then it is understandable why so many bad dog incidents would be blamed on “Pit Bulls” when in fact mutts that are incorrectly identified as “Pit Bulls” are committing a large percentage of those incidents.
For example, the American Society For The Prevention Of Cruelty To Animals at https://www.aspca.org/about-us/faq/pet-statistics states,
“It’s estimated that 70-80 million dogs and 74-96 million cats are owned in the United States. Approximately 37-47% of all households in the United States have a dog, and 30-37% have a cat. (Source: APPA)”
At http://www.humanesociety.org/issues/pet_overpopulation/facts/pet_ownership_statistics.html, the Humane Society of the United States states,
Put your cursor inside the frame and scroll down
and sideways to view all of the information.
The Center for Disease Control and Prevention at http://www.cdc.gov/homeandrecreationalsafety/dog-bites/index.html states,
“Dog Bites
Nearly 4.5 million Americans are bitten by dogs each year, half of these are children.1 One in five dog bites results in injuries serious enough to require medical attention.1”
and
“People with dogs in their homes: Among children and adults, having a dog in the household is associated with a higher incidence of dog bites. As the number of dogs in the home increases, so does the incidence of dog bites. Adults with two or more dogs in the household are five times more likely to be bitten than those living without dogs at home.”
and
“Any dog of any breed has the potential to bite. Dog bites are a largely preventable public health problem”
A report entitled “Breeds of dogs involved in fatal human attacks in the United States between 1979 and 1998” by Jeffrey J. Sacks, MD, MPH; Leslie Sinclair, DVM; Julie Gilchrist, MD; Gail C. Golab, PhD, DVM; and Randall Lockwood, PhD., is frequently cited in making a case against “Pit Bulls”: however, what is always left out is that the data is for “Pit Bull-type” dogs, and the questions that are never answered are “what are “Pit Bull-type” dogs, and how many are there?”. The following is from that report.
“Ideally, breed-specific bite rates would be calculated to compare breeds and quantify the relative dangerousness of each breed. For example, 10 fatal attacks by Breed X relative to a population of 10,000 X’s (1/1,000) implies a greater risk than 100 attacks by Breed Y relative to a population of 1,000,000 Y’s (0.1/1,000).
Without consideration of the population sizes, Breed Y would be perceived to be the more dangerous breed on the basis of the number of fatalities.
Considering only bites that resulted in fatalities, because they are more easily ascertained than nonfatal bites, the numerator of a dog breed-specific human DBRF [Dog bite related fatalities] rate requires a complete accounting of human DBRF as well as an accurate determination of the breeds involved.
Numerator data may be biased for 4 reasons.
First, the human DBRF reported here are likely underestimated; prior work suggests the approach we used identifies only 74% of actual cases.
Second, to the extent that attacks by 1 breed are more newsworthy than those by other breeds, our methods may have resulted in differential ascertainment of fatalities by breed.
Third, because identification of a dog’s breed may be subjective (even experts may disagree on the breed of a particular dog), DBRF may be differentially ascribed to breeds with a reputation for aggression.
Fourth, it is not clear how to count attacks by crossbred dogs. Ignoring these data underestimates breed involvement (29% of attacking dogs were crossbred dogs), whereas including them permits a single dog to be counted more than once.
Therefore, we have elected to present data separately for purebred and crossbred dogs to demonstrate at least 2 alternative counting methods. Relative rankings do not differ greatly whether one focuses only on purebred dogs or includes crossbred dogs. The crossbreed issue is also problematic when estimating denominators (i.e., breed-specific population sizes).
The denominator of a dog breed-specific human DBRF [Dog bite related fatalities] rate requires reliable breed-specific population data. Unfortunately, such data are not currently available. Considering American Kennel Club registration data for Rottweilers in parallel with fatality data for that breed indicates that as the breed has soared in popularity, so have Rottweiler-related deaths (24,195 registrations from 1979 through 1982 and 0 deaths; 272,273 registrations from 1983 through 1990 and 6 deaths; and 692,799 registrations from 1991 through 1998 and 33 deaths). However, official registration or licensing data are likely to be biased, as owners of certain dog breeds may be less likely than those owning other breeds to register or license their dogs and, thus, should not be used to calculate these rates.
Finally, it is imperative to keep in mind that even if breed-specific bite rates could be accurately calculated, they do not factor in owner-related issues. For example, less responsible owners or owners who want to foster aggression in their dogs may be drawn differentially to certain breeds.
Despite these limitations and concerns, the data indicate that Rottweilers and “Pit Bull-type” dogs accounted for 67% of human DBRF in the United States between 1997 and 1998. It is extremely unlikely that they accounted for anywhere near 60% of dogs in the United States during that same period and, thus, there appears to be a breed-specific problem with fatalities.”
I am not an expert in dog breeds nor an advocate or fan of “Pit Bulls”, but I have learned what a so-called “Pit Bull” is supposed to look like and the way to distinguish them from other dogs.
In my lifetime, I cannot remember an attack that I have seen reported in any media where the attacker looked like a so-called commonly referred to “Pit Bull”. As a matter of fact, in my lifetime (I am seventy-two [72] years old), I have seen very few dogs anywhere that look like what a “Pit Bull” is believed to look like. However, I would not be surprised to learn that 60% of the dogs in the United States are considered and called “Pit Bulls” since every mutt that doesn’t look like another identifiable breed is going to be called a “Pit Bull” by most people including bystanders, pet owners, police, medical workers, animal control personnel and so-called “experts”.
Note that when my Beagle-mix dog and I were the victims of an attack that required more than $1,300 dollars to treat both my dog and I and left me with scars on my left arm, I reported a “Pit Bull” attack.
I have now learned that it was NOT a “Pit Bull” that attacked us, but instead it was a “mutt”. In addition, the two other dog bites I have had were from a Dachshund and a Chow, but those dogs were easy to distinguish from other “breeds” of dogs. Ironically, we have been sheltering a Chow for over a year because she has very expensive health issues that no one is willing to accept, but she is a real “doll” that my wife named “Sweet Pea”.
The ASPCA posting on their web site states,
“A “Pit Bull” bite is also far more likely to draw media attention. Many dogs of other breeds bite people, but these incidents almost always go unreported. They’re just not exciting enough fodder for television and print.”
and
“It is truly a shame that the media continues to portray such a warped image of this beautiful, loyal and affectionate breed.”
Pits bulls, Dobermans, Rottweilers and other big dogs have gotten a bad rap for being aggressive dogs that are more likely than other dogs to bite people. But according to the Humane Society of the United States, the Centers for Disease Control, and the American Veterinary Medical Association, no one dog breed is more likely to bite than others.
A report in the Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science published in the Proceedings of Annual American Veterinary Medical Association Convention, July 11-14, 2009 in Seattle, Washington indicates
“Owners of “Pit Bull-type” dogs deal with a strong breed stigma, however controlled studies have not identified this breed group as disproportionately dangerous. The Pit Bull type is particularly ambiguous as a “breed” encompassing a range of pedigree breeds, informal types and appearances that cannot be reliably identified. Visual determination of dog breed is known to not always be reliable. And witnesses may be predisposed to assume that a vicious dog is of this type.”
The following excerpts are also from the ASPCA posting.
“When two dogs fight, the conflict is usually ritualized. The objective is for one dog to win the disagreement with little or no bloodshed. The participants try to intimidate each other by engaging in plenty of dramatic-looking behavior, which may include posturing, circling, growling, showing teeth and snarling. Bites delivered during a fight are typically inhibited because the point is to cause pain but not necessarily to inflict serious injuries.”
and
“Pit Bulls have been bred to behave differently during a fight. They may not give warning before becoming aggressive, and they’re less likely to back down when clashing with an opponent. When provoked, they may become aggressive more readily than another breed might. Sometimes they don’t inhibit their bites, so they may cause injury more often than other dogs.”
and
“Despite the fact that Pit Bulls were bred to fight with each other, early breeders took pride in producing dogs that were trustworthy and friendly to people. Handlers baited their opponent’s dog before a match, stood in the pits with the battling dogs and often pulled them apart to end a fight. Any dog who behaved aggressively toward a person was culled, or killed, to avoid passing on such an undesirable trait. Pit Bulls typically lived in their owner’s homes, where they earned the nickname “nursemaid’s dog” because they were so reliable with young children.”
and
“Pit Bulls were genetically selected for their fighting ability. What does this mean? It doesn’t mean that they can’t be around other dogs, that they’re unpredictably aggressive or that they will always fight to the death. These are all common myths about Pit Bulls. It does mean that they may be easily encouraged to fight with other dogs.”
and
“Sadly, the Pit Bull has acquired a reputation as an unpredictable and dangerous menace. His intimidating appearance has made him attractive to people looking for a macho status symbol, and this popularity has encouraged unscrupulous breeders to produce puppies without maintaining the Pit Bull’s typical good nature with people. To make matters worse, irresponsible owners interested in presenting a tough image often encourage their Pit Bulls to behave aggressively. If a Pit Bull does bite, he’s far more likely to inflict serious injuries than most other breeds, simply because of his size and strength. A Pit Bull bite is also far more likely to draw media attention. Many dogs of other breeds bite people, but these incidents almost always go unreported. They’re just not exciting enough fodder for television and print.”
