Those of us who want safe communities understand that banning or restricting individual dog breeds or Breed Specific Legislation, is a failed model. It has been proven around the world to have no effect on dog attack frequency or severity, and often decreases safety in the communities it is implemented. Until our communities stop focusing on ‘breed’ as if it were a major contributing factor to dog attacks, we will not see safer legislation and therefore communities. It is important when advocating for more effective, proven animal management models (such as the Calgary Model) that we ensure the language we are using is effective and not in fact detrimental to our goal.
We at Team Dog often hear or see comments that are well-intentioned but actually detrimental to our overall goal of taking the focus off breed and towards the more important, proven contributing factors to serious or fatal dog attacks. This post will be one of many in our ‘effective advocacy’ series. Their intention will be to help all of us become more effective advocates for positive change in our community. We’ll be highlighting a few of the not-so-helpful phrases we hear and then providing some helpful alternatives to use instead.
Try to avoid saying:
“X breed bites WAY more than Pit Bulls!”
and
“I got bitten by an X – why don’t they declare them dangerous!”
or
“X breed is much more aggressive than a Pit Bull!”
We know that BSL is an ineffective approach because studies have shown us that breed is not a predictable or reliable contributor to serious or fatal dog attacks. There are other, human influenced and potentially controllable contributors that are much more relevant. By making comments like the above, we are (intentionally or unintentionally) shifting blame to other breeds or types of dogs. This is not only unscientific – we are also playing in to the exact same attitudes that brought about BSL in the first place. It undermines our message – we can’t say that breed is not the cause of dog attacks and then go on to say that other types of dogs are aggressive. The general public hears that contradiction and then discredits the rest of our argument.
We also alienate our fellow dog owning community, and set another ‘type’ of dog up for the same discrimination ‘Pit Bulls’ have had in recent times – continuing to compromise the safety of our communities. As Animal Farm Foundation say in this fantastic blog post: The discrimination buck stops here.
Instead say:
“Studies have shown breed to be a poor predictor of aggression in serious dog attack incidents”
In Dec 2013, The Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association (JAVMA) published the most comprehensive multifactorial study of dog bite-related fatalities (DBRFs) to be completed since the subject was first studied in the 1970’s.
The researchers identified a striking co-occurrence of multiple, controllable factors:
  • no able-bodied person being present to intervene (87.1%);
  • the victim having no familiar relationship with the dog(s) (85.2%);
  • the dog(s) owner failing to neuter/spay the dog(s)(84.4%);
  • a victim’s compromised ability, whether based on age or physical condition, to manage their interactions with the dog(s) (77.4%);
  • the owner keeping dog(s) as resident dog(s), rather than as family pet(s) (76.2%);
  • the owner’s prior mismanagement of the dog(s) (37.5%); and
  • the owner’s abuse or neglect of dog(s) (21.1%).
Four or more of these factors were present in 80.5% of cases; breed was not one of those factors. Read more and bookmark this linkto use it when the topic comes up!
When discussing BSL, always try and keep your comments on the topic of dogs as a whole, and community safety, wherever possible. Dog attacks are a community issue, not a ‘Pit Bull’ issue. If we continue to only talk about ‘Pit Bulls’ whenever we talk about dog attacks, even if we are trying to talk about them in a positive way, we cement the two as intertwined and unable to be separated from one another in the general public’s mind. If the person you are discussing with insists on talking about ‘Pit Bull’ dogs specifically, you can refer them to this study from Lower Saxony, Germany.
Prior to the study, this area had legislative restrictions on six breeds or types of dogs (American Staffordshire terrier, Bull Terrier, Doberman, Rottweiler, Staffordshire Bull Terrier, and dogs of the “pit bull-type”), as they were perceived to be especially dangerous compared to other dogs. The study found that there were no significant differences in the occurrence of aggressive behaviour in inappropriate situations when comparing Golden Retrievers and the six dog breeds affected by legislation. Consequently, legislation in Lower Saxony was changed, and breed lists were withdrawn.
Be a hero in your community and share this post with other advocates who may benefit from it. Friends help friends to be effective advocates!
Got a question about effective advocacy? Shoot it to us in the comments and we’ll get back to you! Seen comments that you’ve thought might not be helpful? Let us know and we can cover them in an upcoming post.