Breed Specific Legislation (BSL) is simply defined as "any statue or regulation that is directed toward one or more specific breeds of dogs". By and large, most BSL concentrates on breeds of dogs deemed dangerous to society based on a breed's propensity towards aggressiveness or violence. Media coverage of vicious dog attacks in the US in the early 1980's led to more stringent laws directed at governing those aggressive dogs but for some communities, those laws quickly morphed into full bans on select breeds, including, but not limited to; American Pit Bull Terriers (APBT), Rottweilers, German Shepard's, Chow Chows, and Doberman Pinchers. New Mexico was the first state to actually condone and encourage the confiscation and destruction of any "pit bull" type dog with many communities following suit. Iowa and Ohio currently have the greatest number of communities practicing BSL, with Fairfield, Iowa actually going so far as to ban any dog over 100 lbs, as well as specific breeds. APBT's, and their relatives, seem to be the breed most often marked for destruction and other extreme sanctions in relation to BSL. Ironically, according to the American Kennel Club, the breed most often referred to as a 'Pit Bull' is actually the American Staffordshire Terrier and not the American Pit Bull Terrier.
For the most part, the data used to determine dangerous dogs are the death statistics compiled by the Humane Society of the United States. According to a report published by "Vet Med Today", in the 17 year period 1979 through 1996, 238 dog bite fatalities were recorded. The data for this report combined the figures from the HSUS, as well as relying on media accounts of various fatal dog attacks. Of these deaths, 66 (27%) were attributed to "Pit Bull Type" dogs, with Rottweilers a close second with 39 deaths. Although these numbers of fatalities are certainly cause for concern, various assumptions have obviously been made in collecting the data. Assumptions that the person filling out the report was knowledgeable and accurate in determining the breed of the dog involved, and assumptions that the media had not embellished the various attacks reported or possibly even inferring that a specific breed was involved when such facts were unknown. Supporters of BSL routinely cite dog bite statistics, both fatal and non-fatal, as a reliable method of determining which breeds are inherently dangerous. However, in the latest report available from the Centers for Disease Control on non-fatal dog bite statistics (2001), one does not find any reference to specific dog breeds involved. In fact, the CDC themselves warn that the bite statistics are unreliable because not all dog bites are reported, nor are all the breeds involved in the incidents accurately identified. The CDC states in the report that the latest comprehensive data of dog bite statistics is from 1994. The 1994 statistics state that more than 4.7 million people are bitten annually with more than 799,000 requiring medical treatment. Therefore, the supporters of BSL are citing statistics that are over 12 years old at best and unreliable at worst.
The biggest problem with BSL, aside from the obvious persecution of innocent dogs, is that it doesn't work. Inaccurate perception of risk, irresponsible owners, subjective breed identification, and the media's portrayal of these breeds are just a few of the problems associated with BSL. Proponents for BSL believe that if a specific breed of dog is banned from their communities, then logically the number of those breeds will decrease thereby decreasing the risks associated with the breed. To accurately determine which breeds should be classified as dangerous, an accurate population of any given breed must be determined. For example, 10 fatal attacks by Breed X relative to a total breed population of 10,000 animals (1/1,000) implies a greater risk than 100 attacks by Breed Y relative to a total breed population of 1,000,000 (0.1/1,000). But looking at total number of attacks alone would indicate that Breed Y would carry the greater risk of fatal attacks. Without accurate numbers of any given breed's population, no one can determine which breed(s) is/are inherently dangerous. Although it is required in most communities to have every dog registered, it would be a gross exaggeration to assume that every dog in the US is registered. Therefore, no accurate breed populations can ever hope to be obtained. Using the death statistics stated earlier, in an attempt to determine the percentage of 'pit bull' type dogs that have caused fatalities, let's make some assumptions of our own. According to Petfinder.com, as of September 19, 2006, there were 9,210 'pit bull' type dogs available for adoption. This figure includes APBT's, Am. Staff's and Staffordshire Bull Terriers. Also assuming that for every homeless dog there are three that do have homes, one could assume a total population of 27,630 'pit bull' type dogs. In reality, this estimate would be a gross understatement. If 66 deaths occurred over the 17 year period, assuming a stable dog population, then the percentage of dogs involved would be less than 0.001% of the population per year. To condemn an entire population of dogs based on the behavior of less than 1/100 of a percent is ludicrous and borders on paranoia.
Furthermore, BSL fails to take into account the root of the problem in any dog bite, fatal or not, which is an irresponsible owner. Irresponsible owners affect the behavior and disposition of their dogs in many ways. From the inexperienced or negligent owner who fails to socialize their dog properly, to those owners whose sole purpose for owning a particular breed is intimidation. For the latter group, BSL poses no obstacles. They will simply choose a breed not currently restricted and train the dog to be aggressive. BSL implies that breeds not restricted or banned are incapable of serious aggression. But the fact is that any dog, from the smallest of the toy breeds to the largest of the giant breeds, can be trained to be aggressive and violent, and even docile animals can exhibit extreme behavioral problems when neglected or abused.
Inaccurate determination of breed allows animal control officials to confiscate and even destroy dogs. The vast majority of animal control personnel are not trained to recognize specific breed characteristics, and many breeds have similar characteristics that can be difficult to distinguish for even the most knowledgeable. These animal control personnel often rely on civilian assurance of breed. It is certainly sobering to think that a neighbor upset over your dog barking in the middle of the night could conceivably report your dog as a banned breed and have that dog confiscated with just a phone call. Especially if your dog happens to have any of the physical characteristics of a banned breed. The flip side of this problem is that shelters all over the US are misleading, whether intentionally or in ignorance, the potential adopter on the actual breed of a dog to make the dog more acceptable. This will eventually create a public perception of shelters being unethical, thereby assuring less and less dogs being adopted, and more dogs being euthanized.
The media plays a huge role in the public perception of canine behavior and risk of aggression. Sadly, the media's portrayal of these breeds is less than favorable. While stories of fatal attacks by Rottweilers or Pit Bull type dogs receive front page coverage, stories of the huge numbers of these vilified breeds who routinely save lives and serve as therapy dogs goes widely unnoticed. The movie industry also deserves some of the blame for the public perception of these breeds. Can any of us recall ever seeing a Labrador Retriever or Border Collie portrayed as a witch's familiar, devil dog, or even a guard dog in any movie? I certainly can't. Yet, movies routinely use Doberman Pinchers and Rottweilers for such roles. Although it may boost the profits of the movie studios or the newspaper publishers, it only perpetuates the misconception that every single dog of any of these breeds is a vicious killer just waiting for an opportunity to strike.
The dog bite epidemic, including fatal attacks, is certainly worth the public's attention and consideration. However, the only logical solutions to the problem are education and more stringent laws. In the CDC report mentioned earlier, a sizeable number of dog bite victims were 14 years of age or younger (42%). This would indicate that the first attempt at educating the public should be in the form of teaching our youngsters how to prevent dog bites and perhaps more importantly, teach them respect for our canine friends so that they may grow to be responsible pet owners. Many communities around the country are choosing to implement dog bite prevention education instead of BSL with great success. Information on these programs is readily available. Along with widespread education programs, more stringent laws must be passed.
Dangerous Dog legislation focuses on individual animals and the deeds of that animal. Animal cruelty laws are laughable in some states, and non-existent in others. Strengthening the current Dangerous Dog laws will put the blame for dog bites, whether fatal or not, where it is warranted, on the individual animal and its owner. Strengthening the animal cruelty laws, including raising the fines and creating mandatory jail sentences for offenders will keep those owners who routinely abuse their animals from being able to create an aggressive animal with their cruelty.
Together, we can fight the stereotypes perpetuated by BSL, by overturning those laws and instead creating education programs and laws that will truly 'Punish the Deed, Not the Breed'.