Stepp |1

Kari Stepp Camilla Mortensen Writing 121 CRN 324277 March 11, 2010

Breed Banning Those of us who are responsible owners should not be punished for the mistakes of others. Our dogs are part of our families and are our friends. Those of us who maintain our dogs so they do not pose a threat to the community should not be denied our companions simply because irresponsible owners of the same breed of dog have not ethically and legally protected others from injury. Breed banning shouldnt be allowed because breed banning is a discriminative action against an animal whose only fault is bad owners. The breed that tends to have the most focus when the discussion of breed banning comes up is the pit bull. The American Pit Bull Terrier is the product of interbreeding between terriers and a breed of bulldogs to produce a dog that combined has the gameness of the terrier with the strength and athleticism of the bulldog. The result was a dog that embodied all of the attributes of great warriors: strength, courage, and gentleness with loved ones (UKC). Pit bulls are not the only type of dog to be created from the bulldog and terrier mixes. Bull terriers and Staffordshire Bull Terriers also share a common family linage to the pit bull. Should these animals be share the same fate and be banned from the communitys as well? There are an estimated 74.8 million owned dogs in the United States; however, the number of pit bull-type dogs has

Stepp |2 not been reliably determined. Animal shelters in the United States euthanized approximately 1.7 million dogs in 2008; approximately 980,000, or 58 percent of these were assessed to have been pit bull-type dogs (Pet ownership statistics). Pit bull and terrier crosses found their way to the United States by way of immigrants. The American Pit Bull Terriers many talents did not go unnoticed by farmers and ranchers. They used these dogs as catch dogs for semi-wild cattle and hogs, to hunt, to drive livestock, and as family companions. American Pit Bull Terriers today successfully fill the role of companion dog, police dog, and therapy dog (Cool K9). Banning pit bulls would be like banning cars because people get killed in car accidents. Whose responsible, the car or the driver/manufacturer? Any car can be deadly in the wrong hands or if built with defective parts. Its the same thing with dogs. Pit Bulls are no more responsible for the way they are bred, raised and trained, than cars are responsible for the way they are designed, built and driven. Dr. Gail C. Golab, co-author of a study regarding breeds and human fatalities and who is also the assistant director of the AVMA Education and Research Division, confirmed, "Breeds responsible for human fatalities have varied over time. Since 1975, dogs belonging to more than 30 breedsincluding Dachshunds, Golden Retrievers, Labrador Retrievers, and a Yorkshire Terrierhave been responsible for fatal attacks on people." The authors of the study also say that, Although fatal human attacks may appear to be a breed-related problem, dogs of other breeds may bite and cause fatalities at higher rates.

Stepp |3 Data in a report published in the Sept 15, 2000 issue of the JAVMA indicate that breed-specific legislation is not the solution to dog bite prevention. The report revealed that, during the past 20 years, at least 25 breeds of dog have been involved in 238 human fatalities. Pit bull-type dogs and Rottweilers were identified as being involved in 66 and 39 fatalities, respectively, over that 20-year period; however, other purebreds and crossbreds caused the remainder of fatalities. Their report also showed that twenty-four percent of deaths involved dogs that were not restrained and were not on their owners' property, 58 percent of deaths involved dogs that were not restrained but were on their owners' property, 17 percent involved restrained dogs on their owners' property, and one percent involved a restrained dog off its owners' property. "Pit bull" is not a breed, but a "type" that includes several registered breeds and crossbreeds. Therefore, statistics that claim "Pit bulls" are responsible for some percentage of attacks are combining many separate breeds together, and then comparing that to other dogs that are counted as individual breeds. There is no attack data without serious flaws. For example, in many cases the specific breed is not verified. Many dog bites go unreported. And no central database or organization exists for reporting and statistics (Breed-specific legislation). There are other consequences for pursuing this ban. When a breed is restricted in a community, or if certain breeds are put on the "bad dog" list, insurance rates for owners of those dogs become exorbitant. "It's really a kind of banning because the liability rates imposed are so great that most people can't afford the insurance which prevents the ability to keep the animal. Owners who have trained, well-behaved dogs become affected by the small percentage of owners whose dogs have been involved in

Stepp |4 aggressive incidents. All the responsible owners of the breed are put to financial hardship. I would prefer to see communities adopt a law that takes all breeds of dog into consideration and is focused on penalizing the owner of the dog with the objectionable behavior. We need to emphasize the value of educational programs for adults and children that teach pet selection strategies, pet care and responsibility, and bite prevention. Pediatrician and medical epidemiologist Dr. Julie Gilchrist from the CDC also promotes the idea of responsible pet ownership. "Dog bite reduction strategies are more likely to be effective if they focus on reducing inappropriate dog and dog owner behaviors, regardless of the dog's breed, instead of on banning specific breeds".(AVMA) Banning pit bulls or any other breed is not the answer. The source of the problem lies with irresponsible breeders or abusive owners. According to attorney Kenneth Phillips at the Web site DogBitelaw.org, any dog, treated harshly or trained to attack, may bite a person or another animal. The owner and handler are responsible for making a dog into something dangerous. It actually takes two years of training to turn a dog into a fighter. During this period the animal suffers horrible abuse including being beaten and antagonized, starved, given steroid injections, spending hours on a treadmill or in a swimming pool, and being almost constantly chained with extraordinarily heavy chains to build the dogs upper-body strength. Even this cruel and inhumane treatment will not guarantee that the dog will fight. Many are abandoned or killed for not performing well enough.

Stepp |5 The only solution is to hold individuals accountable for their own family and pets. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Preventions Website and DogBiteLaw.com, dog bites are largely preventable by following some simple steps and guidelines, including educating children on dog safety; properly socializing and training any dog entering the household; teaching the dog submissive behaviors; and spaying or neutering the dog, just to name a few. We need to continue to prosecute anybody associated with dog fighting and animal abuse in order to shed light on this issue. What kind of message are we telling abusive and irresponsible individuals when we make the dogs pay the price for the humans actions? We need to make sure that we have stiff laws to protect these dogs from cruelty and inhumane treatment and that these laws are strictly enforced. A good case in point that brought worldwide media attention to abusive dog owners was the Michael Vick case. I believe that the hype, sentence, and media attention had little to do with the actual animals and had more to do with the defendant. So even though justice was obtained, I dont think that the most important message was conveyed. In my opinion society as a whole needs to make this a priority if real change is ever going to take hold. In countries such as the United Kingdom and Australia where American Pit Bull Terriers have been banned, research for the Journal of Veterinary Behavior says that there is no evidence that these breed-specific laws significantly reduce the number of dog attacks. Dog attacks in Great Britain actually have increased since breed-specific laws against the American pit bull terrier were introduced.

"When we say that pit bulls are dangerous, we are making a generalization .... Another word for generalization is 'stereotype,' and stereotypes are usually not considered

Stepp |6 desirable dimensions of our decision-making lives. The process of moving from the specific to the general is both necessary and perilous" (New Yorker).

The bottom line is lawmakers need to step in and create laws to govern its citizens not its animals. There needs to be more regulation on owners of animals. Breed banning with not resolve any thing.

Stepp |7

Cite page
"American Pit Bull Terrier" United Kennel Club (UKC). 2008-11-01. Revised November1, 2008.

Retrieved 2010-03-03.

"U.S. pet ownership statistics". Humane Society of the United States. 2008-03-17. Retrieved 200903-02.

"Cool K-9 Popsicle retires". U.S. Customs Today 38 (10). October 2002. Retrieved 2009-03-06.

Gladwell, Malcolm. "Troublemakers." New Yorker Vol. 81, No. 45 Feb. 6 2006: 3843. SIRS Researcher. Web. 08 March 2010.

http://www.avma.org/onlnews/javma/nov00/s111500c.asp Breed-specific legislation and the pit bull terrier: Are the laws justified? Journal of Veterinary Behavior, 2006, and DogBiteLaw.com. Retrieved 2009-03-06

http://www.registerguard.com/csp/cms/sites/web/news/sevendays/2444887735/dog-bull-pit-breed-terrier.csp