Pit Bulls Keep Cleveland Dog Warden Busy

Pits in the news and info on Breed Specific Legislation.

Postby pitbullmamaliz » December 11th, 2009, 6:14 pm

I was hopeful through the first half of the article, but that last investigative piece was ridiculous - he defended vehemently GSD bites (the dogs didn't MEAN to hurt somebody) and compared pits and rotties to pumas. Whatever. I can't wait to get out of Ohio.

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2008/08 ... ys_fo.html

Thousands of pit bulls live in Cleveland. City law requires pit bull owners to cage them, to muzzle them when they are being walked and to carry liability insurance. Many owners ignore the law, so city dog wardens confiscate the dogs and euthanize them.
Last year, the city killed 1,335 pit bulls. So far this year, 737 have been put down.
Plain Dealer videographer Lonnie Timmons III follows a dog warden on the job. The warden catches a stray pit bull and confiscates another from a family that hadn't complied with the pit bull law. Both dogs were put down.
The Cleveland Animal Protective League is also forced to euthanize pit bulls -- those that are surrendered by their owners and those confiscated from neglectful or cruel owners.
(NOTE: Pit bulls do not have "locking jaws." No breed of dog does. The dog warden in the video is describing a biting dog's tenacity when he refers to "locking jaws.")
View reports regarding the inaccuracies of dog bite studies and the ineffectiveness of bans from the Center for Disease Control, the American Veterinary Medical Association, the National Animal Interest Alliance and Canine Advocates of Ohio.
1979 - 1998 Center for Disease Control
FATAL DOG ATTACK STUDY
Breed Number of Deaths
PUREBRED
Pit Bull Type 66
Rottweiler 39
German Shepherd 17
Husky Type 15
Malamute 12
Doberman Pinscher 9
Chow Chow 8
Great Dane 7
Saint Bernard 7
TOTAL FOR PUREBRED DEATHS: 180

CROSSBRED
Wolf Dog Hybrid 14
Mixed Breed 12
German Shepherd 10
Pit Bull Type 10
Husky Type 6
Rottweiler 5
Alaskan Malamute 3
Chow Chow 3
Doberman Pinscher 0
Saint Bernard 1
Great Dane 0
TOTAL FOR CROSSBRED DEATHS: 64

UNKNOWN BREED: 238

TOTAL DEATHS: 1979-1998 482
----------------------------------------------------------------
An analysis media accounts of dog attack deaths and maimings in the U.S. & Canada
September 1982 to July 30, 2008
by Merritt Clifton
Editor, ANIMAL PEOPLE newspaper
(reprinted with permission)
Reports are logged as received, and the current log is
printed out as requested. Compiled by the editor of ANIMAL PEOPLE
from press accounts since 1982, this table covers only attacks by
dogs of clearly identified breed type or ancestry, as designated by
animal control officers or others with evident expertise, who have
been kept as pets. Due to the exclusion of dogs whose breed type may
be uncertain, this is by no means a complete list of fatal and
otherwise serious dog attacks. Attacks by police dogs, guard dogs,
and dogs trained specifically to fight are also excluded. "Attacks
doing bodily harm" includes all fatalities, maimings, and other
injuries requiring extensive hospital treatment. "Maimings" includes
permanent disfigurement or loss of a limb. Where there is an
asterisk (*), please see footnotes. If there are more "attacks"
than "victims," it means that there were multiple dogs involved in
some attacks. If the numbers of "victims" does not equal the numbers
of "deaths" and "maimings," it means that some of the victims -- in
attacks in which some people were killed or maimed -- were not killed
or maimed. Over the duration of the data collection, the severity
of the logged attacks appears to be at approximately the
1-bite-in-10,000 level.

Attacks doing Child Adult Deaths Maimings
bodily harm victims victims

Akita 48 32 14 1 39
Akita mix (inspecific) 2 2 0 0 2
Akita/Chow mix 3 3 0 0 3
Akita/Lab mix 1 1 0 0 1
Akita/terrier mix 2 1 0 0 1
Airedale/boxer 1 1 0 1 0 #
Airedale 1 1 0 1 0
American bulldog (not pit) 7 1 2 2 1 #
Australian blue heeler 8 2 1 0 3
Australian cattle dog 1 1 0 0 1
Australian shepherd 7 5 0 0 2
Australian shepherd mix 1 0 1 1 0 #
Basset/GSD mix 1 1 0 1 0
Basset/beagle mix 1 1 0 0 1
Beagle 2 2 0 1 1 #
Belgian shepherd 5 2 3 0 2
Blue heeler 2 0 1 0 1
Border collie 1 0 1 1 1 #
Boxer 35 9 13 2 16 #
Boxer mix 2 2 0 1 1
Briard 2 0 1 1 0
Brittany spaniel 4 1 0 0 1
Bulldog (American 4 0 3 2 2
Bulldog (English) 16 8 3 1 9
Bull mastiff (Presa Canario) 37 11 17 7 19
Bull mastiff/German shepherd 2 1 0 1 0
Buff mastiff/Rottweiler 1 1 0 0 1
Bull mastiff/Boxer 1 1 0 1 0
Bull terrier (not pit) 2 1 1 0 1
Cane Corso 5 1 3 1 4
Catahoula 3 0 1 0 1
Catahoula/pit bull mix 1 0 1 1 0
Chow 51 34 14 6 34
Chow/German shepherd 1 0 1 0 1
Chow/husky mix 2 2 0 1 1
Chow/Labrador mix 4 4 0 0 3
Chox mix (other) 2 2 0 0 2
Cocker spaniel 1 1 0 0 1
Collie 3 3 0 0 3
Collie/retriever mix 1 1 0 0 1
Coonhound 1 1 0 0 0
Dalmatian 3 3 0 0 3
Dalmatian/Akita mix 1 1 0 0 1
Dauschund 5 3 2 1 5 #
Doberman 12 8 4 4 7 #
Dogo Argentino 1 1 0 0 1
Doge de Bordeaux 2 1 0 0 1
East Highland terrier 1 0 1 1 0 #
Fila Brasiero 1 1 0 0 1
German shepherd 70 45 19 9 42
German shepherd mix 34 23 8 7 21 #
German shepherd/husky mix 4 3 1 1 2
German shepherd/Lab mix 2 0 1 0 1
Golden retriever 8 7 1 2 5 #
Golden retriever mix 1 0 1 1 0 #
Great Dane 25 5 5 2 10
Great Pyranees 1 0 1 1 0
Greyhound 1 1 0 0 1
Husky 42 25 4 15 8
Husky/Malamute mix 2 2 0 0 2
Husky/Labrador mix 1 0 1 0 1
Jack Russell terrier 3 2 1 2 0 #
Labrador 30 20 11 3 23 #
Labrador mix 11 9 2 0 10 #
Labrador/boxer mix 1 0 1 0 0
Lab-Doberman 1 1 0 0 1
Lab-St. Bernard 1 1 0 0 1
Malamute 8 7 1 3 3
Maremma 1 0 1 0 1
Mastiff 18 12 4 4 11
Norwegian elkhound 1 0 1 0 1 #
Old English sheep dog 2 1 1 2 0 #
Pit bull terrier 1251 550 442 125 680 #
Pit bull boxer mix 9 3 4 0 6
Pit bull/chow mix 5 2 3 1 3
Pit bull/Doberman/GSD/Lab 2 2 0 0 2
Pit bull/GSD mix 1 1 0 0 1
Pit bull/Lab mix 15 10 4 3 8 #
Pit bull/Rott. mix 39 7 3 2 8
Pit bull/Sheltie mix 1 1 0 0 1
Pit bull/Weimaraner mix 1 0 1 0 1
Pit mix unknown 4 2 1 0 3
Pointer mix 1 0 1 0 0 #
Pomeranian 1 1 0 1 0
Poodle 2 1 1 0 2 #
Poodle/terrier 1 1 0 0 1
Pug 1 1 0 0 1
Pug/Rottweiler mix 2 1 0 1 0
Queensland heeler 3 0 1 0 1
Rottweiler 429 245 113 63 234 #
Rottweiler/chow mix 1 1 0 0 1
Rottweiler/GSD mix 14 8 5 3 10
Rottweiler/Labrador 7 6 1 0 7
Russian terrier 1 0 1 0 1
Saint Bernard 6 3 0 1 1
Sharpei 5 5 0 0 5
Sharpei/Rottweiler 2 1 0 0 1
Sharpei/unknown mix 1 1 0 0 1
Sharpei/Labrador 1 1 0 0 1
Springer spaniel 3 4 0 0 4
Terrier mix (not pit bull) 1 0 1 0 1
Tosa 1 1 0 0 1
Weimaeaner 1 1 0 0 1
Wheaten terrier 2 1 0 0 1
Wolf hybrid 80 66 4 19 44 #
Total: 2447 1239 734 307 1340
Pit bulls, Rottweilers, Presa Canarios, and their mixes:
1818 851 596 204 988
73% 67% 82% 67% 72%
Pit, Rott, Wolf hybrid 1754 863 563 208 960
77% 73% 83% 70% 77%
Analysis
The tallies of attacks, attacks on children, attacks on
adults, fatalities, and maimings on the above data sheet must be
evaluated in three different contexts. The first pertains to
breed-specific characteristic behavior, the second to bite frequency
as opposed to the frequency of severe injuries. and the third to
degree of relative risk.
Of the breeds most often involved in incidents of sufficient
severity to be listed, pit bull terriers and their close mixes make
up only about 5% of the total U.S. dog population, according to my
frequent surveys of regionally balanced samples of classified ads of
dogs for sale, but they constitute more than 20% of the dog
population in U.S. animal shelters at any given time, according to
my 2004 and 2008 single-day shelter inventory surveys, the most
recent of which brought responses from a regionally balanced sampling
of 62 shelters, holding 5,236 dogs on the survey date. Animal
control shelters, with the primary responsibility for responding to
"dangerous dog" calls, made up 60% of the survey base and held 23%
pit bulls.
Pit bulls are noteworthy on the chart above for attacking adults
almost as frequently as children. This is a very rare pattern:
children are normally at greatest risk from dogbite because they play
with dogs more often, have less experience in reading dog behavior,
are more likely to engage in activity that alarms or stimulates a
dog, and are less able to defend themselves when a dog becomes
aggressive. Pit bulls seem to differ behaviorally from other dogs in
having far less inhibition about attacking people who are larger than
they are. They are also notorious for attacking seemingly without
warning, a tendency exacerbated by the custom of docking pit bulls'
tails so that warning signals are not easily recognized. Thus the
adult victim of a pit bull attack may have had little or no
opportunity to read the warning signals that would avert an attack
from any other dog.
Rottweilers by contrast show a fairly normal child/adult
attack ratio. They seem to show up disproportionately often in the
mauling, killing, and maiming statistics simply because they are
both quite popular and very powerful, capable of doing a great deal
of damage in cases where bites by other breeds might be relatively
harmless.
Wolf hybrids, German shepherds, and huskies are at the
extreme opposite end of the scale, almost never inflicting severe
injury on adults--but it would be a huge mistake to assume that these
seemingly similar patterns reflect similar behavior. They do not.
In fact, German shepherds and German shepherd mixes in which the
German shepherd line predominates together amount to 16% of the
entire U.S. and Canadian dog population, according to the data we
have on breed-specific licensing, or just about nine million total
dogs. There are by contrast only about 300,000 recognized wolf
hybrids: about one for every 30 German shepherds. Relative to their
overall numbers, wolf hybrids are accordingly 60 times more likely
to kill or maim a child than a German shepherd--and that is before
even beginning to consider the critical behavioral distinctions.
German shepherds are herding dogs, bred for generations to
guide and protect sheep. In modern society, they are among the dogs
of choice for families with small children, because of their
extremely strong protective instinct. They have three distinctively
different kinds of bite: the guiding nip, which is gentle and does
not break the skin; the grab-and-drag, to pull a puppy or lamb or
child away from danger, which is as gentle as emergency
circumstances allow; and the reactive bite, usually in defense of
territory, a child, or someone else the dog is inclined to guard.
The reactive bite usually comes only after many warning barks,
growls, and other exhibitions intended to avert a conflict. When it
does come, it is typically accompanied by a frontal leap for the
wrist or throat.
Because German shepherds often use the guiding nip and the
grab-and-drag with children, who sometimes misread the dogs'
intentions and pull away in panic, they are involved in biting
incidents at almost twice the rate that their numbers alone would
predict: approximately 28% of all bite cases, according to a recent
five-year compilation of Minneapolis animal control data. Yet none
of the Minneapolis bites by German shepherds involved a serious
injury: hurting someone is almost never the dogs' intent.
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.
Every one of the wolf hybrid attacks, however, seems to
have been predatory. Only four of the fatality victims were older
than age seven, and all three were of small stature. The first
adult fatality was killed in the presence of her two young sons,
whom she was apparently trying to protect. The second was killed
while apparently trying to protect her dog. Most of the victims were
killed very quickly. Some never knew the wolf hybrid was present.
Some may never have known what hit them. Some were killed right in
front of parents, who had no time to react.
Unlike German shepherds, wolf hybrids are usually kept well
apart from children, and from any people other than their owners.
Yet they have still found more opportunity to kill and maim than
members of any other breeds except pit bull terriers and Rottweilers,
each of whom may outnumber wolf hybrids by about 10 to 1.
Huskies appear to be a special case, in that even though
they are common in the U.S., the life-threatening attacks involving
them have virtually all occured in Alaska, the Northwest
Territories, the Yukon, Labrador, and the northernmost parts of
Quebec. In these regions, huskies are frequently kept in packs, in
semi-natural conditions, and in some cases are even allowed to spend
summers without regular human supervision. Thus many of the husky
attack cases might be viewed more as attacks by feral animals, even
though they technically qualified for this log because they were
identified as owned and trained animals, who were supposed to know
that they were not to attack.
Akitas, Malamutes, and Samoyeds have a similar attack
pattern, but while these are also "northern breeds" commonly used to
pull sleds, most of the attacks by Akitas, Malamutes, and Samoyeds
have occurred in ordinary home situations. Cumulatively, the
northern breeds appear to have an attack pattern resembling that of
wolf hybrids more than that of most other dogs--which might merely
point toward the numbers of wolf hybrids who are illegally kept under
the pretense that they are various of the northern breeds.
What all this may mean relative to legislation is
problematic. Historically, breed-specific legislation has proved
very difficult to enforce because of the problems inherent in
defining animals for whom there may be no breed standards, or
conflicting standards. Both pit bull terriers and wolf hybrids tend
to elude easy legal definition; neither can they be recognized by
genetic testing.
The traditional approach to dangerous dog legislation is to
allow "one free bite," at which point the owner is warned. On
second bite, the dog is killed. The traditional approach, however,
patently does not apply in addressing the threats from pit bull
terriers, Rottweilers, and wolf hybrids. In more than two-thirds
of the cases I have logged, the life-threatening or fatal attack was
apparently the first known dangerous behavior by the animal in
question. Children and elderly people were almost always the victims.
Any law strong enough and directed enough to prevent the
majority of life-threatening dog attacks must discriminate heavily
against pit bulls, Rottweilers, wolf hybrids, and perhaps Akitas
and chows, who are not common breeds but do seem to be involved in
disproportionate numbers of life-threatening attacks. Such
discrimination will never be popular with the owners of these breeds,
especially those who believe their dogs are neither dangerous nor
likely to turn dangerous without strong provocation. Neither will
breed discrimination ever be acceptable to those who hold out for an
interpretation of animal rights philosophy which holds that all
breeds are created equal. One might hope that educating the public
against the acquisition of dangerous dogs would help; but the very
traits that make certain breeds dangerous also appeal to a certain
class of dog owner. Thus publicizing their potentially hazardous
nature has tended to increase these breeds' popularity.
Meanwhile, because the humane community has demonstrated a
profound unwillingness to recognize, accept, and respond to the
need for some sort of strong breed-specific regulation to deal with
pit bulls and Rottweilers, the insurance industry is doing the
regulating instead, by means which include refusing to insure new
shelters which accept and place pit bulls. That means a mandatory
death sentence for most pit bulls, regardless of why they come to
shelters.
This is not a problem for older shelters, which have long
established insurer relationships, but it is a hell of a problem for
organizations without long histories of successful and mostly
accident-free adoption, predating the present abundance of pit bulls
and Rottweilers in the shelter dog population.
Individual dog owners are also getting clobbered, either
with liability premiums so high that no one can afford to keep pit
bulls or Rottweilers, or by inability to find an insurer willing to
cover anyone who has such a dog--or any other dog breed with a bad
reputation, whether or not the reputation is deserved. (Compare
attacks by pit bulls with attacks by Dobermans on the chart above.)
This in turn means more pit bulls, Rottweilers, et al being
surrendered to shelters, when their people cannot find rental
accommodations or even buy a house because of their inability to
obtain liability insurance.
The humane community does not try to encourage the adoption
of pumas in the same manner that we encourage the adoption of felis
catus, because even though a puma can also be box-trained and
otherwise exhibits much the same indoor behavior, it is clearly
understood that accidents with a puma are frequently fatal.
For the same reason, it 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.
Temperament is not the issue, nor is it even relevant. What
is relevant is actuarial risk. 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.
Pit bulls and Rottweilers are accordingly dogs who not only
must be handled with special precautions, but also must be regulated
with special requirements appropriate to the risk they may pose to
the public and other animals, if they are to be kept at all.

Merritt Clifton
Editor, ANIMAL PEOPLE
P.O. Box 960
Clinton, WA 98236
Telephone: 360-579-2505
Fax: 360-579-2575
E-mail: anmlpepl@whidbey.com
Web: http://www.animalpeoplenews.org
[ANIMAL PEOPLE is the leading independent newspaper providing
original investigative coverage of animal protection worldwide,
founded in 1992. Our readership of 30,000-plus includes the
decision-makers at more than 10,000 animal protection organizations.
We have no alignment or affiliation with any other entity. $24/year;
for free sample, send address.]
"Remember - every time your dog gets somewhere on a tight leash *a fairy dies and it's all your fault.* Think of the fairies." http://www.positivepetzine.com"

http://www.pitbullzen.com
http://inaradog.wordpress.com
User avatar
pitbullmamaliz
Working out in the buff causes chafing
 
Posts: 15437
Location: Cleveland, OH

Postby iluvk9 » December 11th, 2009, 6:25 pm

All I know is Lenny would bite his ass. :)
iluvk9
I'm Cougarific!
 
Posts: 14900
Location: New York

Postby demolitionic » December 13th, 2009, 5:06 pm

I like the fact that the news reporter can't be bothered to stop humping his own leg enough to verify his sources. Perhaps then he'd find out that the infamous Merritt Clifton report has been invalidated, disproven, and discredited roughly eleventy gajillion times.

You know what's more "dangerous" than "vicious dogs"? Irresponsible news media who perpetuate complete horseshit because they're more interested in the sales figures mass hysteria brings than their civic duty to report the truth to the consumers they serve.
Time to nut up or shut up.
User avatar
demolitionic
Devoutly Bully
 
Posts: 810
Location: protective custody

Postby pitsnok » December 13th, 2009, 6:47 pm

My favorite part is "pit bull type" listed under the purebred section making up 66 bites.
How unfair to lump all of them together when every other breed is listed specifically!

"Pit bull type", as far as I'm concerned, refers to APBT, Amstaffs, Staffys, and the new, Ambullys (although they aren't technically recognized). And really this could also be referring to american bulldogs and other bully breeds.
So... if you divide 66 by (at least) 4 you get 16.5.
If pit bulls were being treated like all the other dogs, according to these statistics, each "pit" breed would (roughly) account for 10% of total bites, not 36%.

How do so many people miss this?!


It amazes me that people, even people with the audacity to publicly report on a subject are SO uneducated on what they are reporting.


WTF!
~Brittany, Degan and Harlow's mom


"It is true that Pit Bulls grab and hold on. But what they most often grab and refuse to let go of is your heart, not your arm."
User avatar
pitsnok
Hyper Adolescent Bully
 
Posts: 365
Location: Edmond, OK


Return to Pit Bull news and BSL

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

cron