Test; Can You Pick The Mauling Dog(s)?

[gemi_babe]

the following web-page has an interesting multiple-choice test, using real incidents of severe maulings by dogs in the US of A.

Can you pick the dog responsible by breed?


http://ncrf2004.tripod.com/id6.html

[kiwigeo]

the following web-page has an interesting multiple-choice test, using real incidents of severe maulings by dogs in the US of A.

Can you pick the dog responsible by breed?

Never been bitten by a dog but the other day a good friend of mine got bitten by a Bandicoot.

[Grunt]

Over the years I've been bitten by a number of dogs. They were all little yappy terrier type dogs.

I had a look at that the www.edba.org.au. Interesting site. I don't believe that a particular dog breed should be banned because any dog with proper training (beaten, kicked etc) can become a killer.

Sadly some dog breeds attract the wrong type of owner. Those who want a 'tuff' dog. The dogs are treated as above and we end up with dog attacks.

I actually think that all dog owners should have to take a test or do a training course on dog behaviour and training. I've known a couple who bought a dobberman and because they didn't understand pack mentality and how to deal with dominance, the dobberman was out of control and became the pack leader. Sadly, this dog was put down.

[Alastair]

FWIW

Soe years ago I saw a study published that showed that the most dangerous dog (ie most bites recorded) was the favourite kids pet, the cocker spaniel.

This highlights one of the pitfalls of statistics. Because the cocker is so popular, there are going to be more incidents than with a scarcer breed. This ties up with what Grunt said.

However, a kid bitten by a bad tempered Cocker will probably need stitches, while the kid bitten by a Rottweiller, or Pit Bull Terrier is more likely to need a body bag.

Which all goes to confirm the saying:

There are lies, damn lies, and statistics!

Alastair

[LineLefty]

This link: http://www.dlg.nsw.gov.au/dlg/dlghom...tion/Rpt96.pdf

shows the following stats (Breed) (No. Attacks) (Percentage)

1. CROSS 159 35%
2. GERMANSHEPHERD 61 14%
3. UNKNOWN 49 11%
4. CATTLE DOG TYPES 40 9%
5. ROTTWEILER 39 9%
6. BULL TERRIER TYPES 38 8%
7. DOBERMAN 12 3%
8. COLLIE TYPES 9 2%
9. TERRIER TYPES 9 2%
10. BOXER 8 2%

Not really that usefull but there is an abundance of ******** statistics on the net about dog attacks. There is a need for a comprehensive survey of attacks by breed but it desperately needs to be compared to the population of the breed!

Sure there is no Presa Canario attacks in Australia but theres probably only 100 or so dogs. Similarly, there are thousands upon thousands of Labs/Goldies and they don't rate a mention.

Despite the protestations of their owners, Pitbulls, Rotties, Dobermans, Akitas, Chows, Presa Canarios are intimidating, threatening dogs and people will want them banned. In the case of Pitbulls, Akitas, and Presa's I'm all for it.

[LineLefty]

To add my own experience. My wife worked in a boarding kennels a few years ago and we used to mind the complex when the owners went away. That experience taught me a couple of things.

The most dangerous breeds in our backyards are the cattle dogs. They dont tend to maul people but they just have tendency to just warn kids/people with a quick chomp.
Thats why the'ye called heelers.

I've seen a Presa Canario in the flesh. If ever there was an advert for breed specific legislation they're it. I don't care what the edba says those dogs are so in bred that they've lost the pack instinct and are just aloof, unpredictable brutes.

And Grunt, in my humble opinion boxers are definitely the bimbos of the dog world. Gorgeous, muscular scaredy cats.

Finaly, my wife probably handled 2000 dogs in her time and the only bite she ever recieved was from.........a little POS jack russell. Why anyone would want one of those arrogant yappy things beyond me.

[Grunt]

And Grunt, in my humble opinion boxers are definitely the bimbos of the dog world. Gorgeous, muscular scaredy cats.

I'm not sure about bimbos, I think clown is more appropriate. Both of mine are almost 8 years old and the haven't grown up yet. They are too busy playing to pay much attention to me, unless there is food or a ball involved.

The bimbo of the dog world has to be the afgan. My sister had one. Brain the size of a pea.

Yes, boxers are definately scaredy cats but it would be a braver man than me to jump a fence with 2 barking boxers on the other side.

Chris

[ptc]

Today
that "thing"on the left ,pinched my poweball
and when i tried to get it back she bit me.it was a good one 4 plasters.
needless to say she ate the power ball
*****.
by the way it was my own fault.
ptc

[Grunt]

Since this is more interesting than doing work:





Some of the sites that I went to while looking for the above were interesting. A number of sites were from lawyers trying to hawk there wares.

Also, I found out that 2% of the US population get bitten by a dog each year. I don't think the dogs are trying hard enough.

[Christopha]

Today
that "thing"on the left ,pinched my poweball
and when i tried to get it back she bit me.it was a good one 4 plasters.
needless to say she ate the power ball
*****.
by the way it was my own fault.
ptc

I hope the poor dog got vaccinated!

[kiwigeo]

Not really that usefull but there is an abundance of ******** statistics on the net about dog attacks. There is a need for a comprehensive survey of attacks by breed but it desperately needs to be compared to the population of the breed!

I'd also like to see Australian native animals ranked in similar fashion....would be interesting to see where bandicoots would rank on such a list.

[gemi_babe]

Do some breeds attack more?
The real question is, ‘are there particular breeds of dog which bite more than others?’
A dogs tendency to bite is the product of at least five factors: The dogs genetic predisposition to aggression; early socialisation to humans; its training or mistraining;the quality of its care and supervision; and the behaviour of the victim(6). Genetics is only one of these factors. The breeds of dog that have been labelled as dangerous varies not only from country to country but over time. Breeds which have attracted attention as being ‘vicious’ over the years have included, German Shepherds, Dobermans, Rottweilers, American Pit Bull Terriers, Chow Chows, Akitas, St Bernards, Bloodhounds, Great Danes, and even the Australian Cattle Dog.
To answer the question, are some breeds more dangerous, we would require reliable data on dog bites by breed as well as corresponding data for the dog population at large also by breed. Unfortunately given the inherent problems in accurately identifying a dogs breed, these data do not exist(7). However, over the years there have been various attempts at reporting dog bite data by breed the results of which are summarised in Table 1. What is notable about these studies is the diversity of breeds mentioned in reports as well as the persistence of particular breeds. For example German Shepherds were mentioned in 28 out of 31 studies but some breeds such as Chihuahuas and Shih Tzus were only mentioned once. It is also interesting to note that
Pit Bull terriers were mentioned in only eight reports. One also must remember that the definition of “Pit Bull”, not a recognised breed of dog, varies from place to place.
In the US the term “Pit Bull” is generally used to describe all bull terrier type dogs, ie the American Pit Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier and the Staffordshire Bull Terrier, and often the English Bull Terrier, and American Bull Dog. On the other hand some authors use the term “Bull Terrier”, a recognised breed, to mean all bull terrier type dogs. In Australia there appears to be no clear usage of either the term.
There are few studies which have attempted to measure the relative dangers of particular breeds and also use reliable measures of the relative frequency of the breeds in the dog population(8-13). All but one of these studies identified German Shepherds as being over represented in dog bite statistics with relative risks ranging from 3.4 to 1.8. The other, a cohort study of over 3000 dogs found that German Shepherds were no more likely to bite than Labrador Retrievers a result the authors attribute to their being involved in more cases of attacks outside the home which were not the subject
of their study(12). The study also found that mixed breed dogs were no more likely to bite than pure breeds. None of the studies identified Pit Bull Terriers as being over represented in dog bite statistics although the study by Thompson found Bull Terrier type dogs to be over represented although there were no American Pit Bull Terriers featured in the study(11). More recent data provided by the author shows that although GSDs, Rottweilers and Bull Terriers are still over represented, Jack Russell Terriers have now joined the list at number two (RR=2.3) after Rottweillers, while Australian Cattle Dogs have now been relegated to the ‘safe’ list (RR=0.6). This indicates that although some breeds consistently feature on ‘bad’ dog lists others
come and go as dog ownership fashion changes.
One may speculate, given these results, why it has never been proposed that the keeping or breeding of German Shepherds again be restricted.

I have the full article and more in PDF form if anyone is interested.

[gemi_babe]

The next question to be resolved is ‘do attacks involving Pit Bulls result in more severe injuries?’ As expected there are very few studies examining this particular question. Of the two reports cited here one is an analysis of dog attacks reported in the media while the other is a study of animal attacks reported to a animal control officers of a local authority (6, 14). The report by Lockwood and Rindy which relied on unvalidated media reports of dog attacks found that more than half of the 278 reports involved Pit Bulls(6). When this study is compared to other contemporary studies this figure appears high indicating a reporting bias towards attacks involving this type of
dog. Another bias inherent in this study is that the injury severity was not validated and, in light of the hysteria surrounding this breed, media reports may have tended to overstate the severity of the injuries where Pit Bulls were involved. Also media reports may be more likely to wrongly identify the breed as a Pit Bull where the injuries are more severe. These biases were recognised by the authors. Of the 143 Pit Bull attacks 38.5% were regarded as serious (requiring medical attention) compared to 26.7% where other breeds were involved. This result was not statistically significant. The authors also found that the common theme in virtually all attacks reviewed was that the owner had not taken appropriate steps to prevent the dog from becoming a problem and that irresponsible owners are not a problem unique to one particular breed. Consequently they recommend that dog control legislation must
emphasise responsible ownership.
The other study involves reports of 2132 animal bites in 1993 to animal control authorities in Palm Beach County(14). All bites were graded for severity from 1. Very superficial wound requiring little or no first aid, to 5. Death. There were 143 pit bull attacks comprising 8% of all bites of which 16% had a severity of 3 or above (requiring medical attention). Corresponding figures for other popular breeds are Dalmatian 24%, Rottweiler 21%, Doberman 17%, Golden Retriever 16%, Labrador Retriever 16% and German Shepherd 12%. Compared to other popular breeds the figure for Pit Bulls does not appear to be excessive.

[kiwigeo]

Have been thinking about getting a dog but after reading all these posts Im confused.

Used to have a Springer Spaniel..well it wasnt technically my dog but it couldnt stand its owners so would spend all day (and most nights) at my place. She was as thick as two short planks but what she lacked in intelligence she made up for in entertainment value and just plain old good company.

Anyway the choice is a Springer or a Fox Terrier....whadayareckon?

[Sturdee]

Can you pick the dog responsible by breed?

I don't care what breed they are, if they attack people than they ought to be exterminated.

My wife has twice been attacked by dogs that their irresponsible owners allowed to roam the streets. Each time we made complaints to both the owner and the by-laws officer. The first time the by-laws officer did not want to do anything about it. I made numerous phone calls to this officer, all to no avail. Only when I got my friendly QC to issue a writ against the Council for failing to carry out its duty, did they proceed against the dog owner, and then with a vengence. Result a $ 250 fine and dog executed. Second time only one phone call to the by-law officer was necessary. Similar court result.

I have nothing against responsible dog owners but IMHO if they are irresponsible owners may be they themself should also be exterminated.

Peter.