Rethinking 'Pit Bulls' Don Cleary is the Director of Communications and Publications for the National Canine Research Council.

Don is an expert on the myths of canine aggression and how they negatively impact contemporary animal welfare policies that result in discrimination, barriers to adoption and breed bans.

Don Cleary opens his seminar with “We need to rethink dogs, not just pit bulls.”

He explains that many advocates focus on pit bull type dogs because of their misrepresentation and demonisation, but as a whole we must rethink dogs in general. This will allow the focus to shift from the dog to the responsibility of the owner.

'Pit bull' is a term used to describe a group of dogs. It is not a registered breed. 'Pit bull' is not recognised as a breed by kennel clubs, dog registries or companies that offer DNA analysis.

Jane Berkey, President of Animal Farm Foundation, Inc. states that the term pit bull “describes a group of dogs that includes American Staffordshire Terriers, Staffordshire Bull Terriers, American Pit Bull Terriers, an increasing number of other pure breeds, and an ever-increasing group of dogs that are presumed, on the basis of appearance, to be mixes of one or more of those breeds.” (Berkey 2009)

Cleary explains that the public believe that there is a breed called the 'pit bull' and that this breed displays aggressive and vicious behaviour. These views have been developed from:

. print media, TV news reports and radio

. advice from professionals: shelter managers, veterinarians and behaviourists

. claims of injured parties

. policies of commercial providers (landlords, dog daycare, airliners)

. statements of the law

The public have been influenced by these people and groups to expect particular behaviours from 'pit bulls' and even their own dogs, based only on stereotyping and breed bias.

Cleary discusses the myths about pit bull type dogs:

. they bite differently and produce injuries like no other dog

. they can lock their jaw when they bite

. they attack without warning and are unpredictable

. if raised as pets they turn on their owners. they feel no pain or have and increased pain threshold

Page 1 www.pawproject.com.au

These myths are made from judgement and not science. To state that one particular vertebrate mammal has an absence of pain is nonsensical. And to treat one particular vertebrate mammal as though it does not experience pain or has a higher pain threshold, brings obvious and serious ethical implications.

Breed Specific Legislation (BSL) is a law that discriminates by breed and breed generalisations, but not by particular behaviours that a dog displays and acts upon. The fundamental basis of this dog legislation is to remove particular breeds from society with the rationale that it will improve public safety. This is why BSL is increasingly known as breed discriminatory legislation (BDL).

Cleary explains that there has never been any evidence to suggest that breed bans or restrictions improve public safety. In 2008, the Netherlands repealed its breed ban and in 2009, Italy repealed its breed specific regulations because it had not decreased dog bites.

In Australia, breed regulations differ from state to state. They range from outright bans of particular, to a menagerie of containment, muzzling and other restrictions that restrict the dogs socialisation. Breed discriminatory legislation is not supported by the Australian Veterinary Association and state that they “do not support breed specific legislation for dog bite prevention, because experience in other countries has shown that such legislation has failed to reduce the frequency of dog bites.” (AVA) Nor does the RSPCA support BDL, “RSPCA believes that dogs should not be declared dangerous on the basis of breed.” (RSPCA)

The Australian Capital Territory does not have BSL. Their laws focus on the responsibility of the owner and the behaviour of the dog. The Director of RSPCA ACT, Michael Linke who owns pit bull type dog called Dahlia, (pictured right) is anticipating that ACT will lead the way in public safety and responsible pet ownership.

Brad Griggs, Director of Melbourne based Canine Services International, specialises in canine behaviour and aggression, obedience training and law enforcement training and has appeared on TV morning shows discussing his reasons for opposing BDL.

Griggs states that “In my professional experience, breed consistently proves to be a poor predictor of aggression. Breed focused approach to dog bite prevention continue to make the public more unsafe each day, as it removes well behaved, well adjusted dogs, based on appearance and overlooks genuinely problematic and dangerous dogs because they do not fit a certain visual description.”

There is no documented evidence to substantiate that BDL in Australia has decreased the incidences of dog bites and has created a safer communities.

Griggs explains “While the animal management community is forced by poor legislation to enforce laws that focus on breed instead of individual temperament, the public is lulled into a false sense of security that dog bite prevention starts and ends with a handful of breeds.” (Griggs, 2012)

Brad Griggs on Sunrise, Channel 7

Page 2 www.pawproject.com.au

The media categorise dog bites as 'epidemics' and discuss dog bite statistics. Cleary says there is no dog bite epidemic. He explains that not all people that are bitten or attacked, regardless of severity, do not attend the Emergency Department for treatment. Therefore, Emergency Department are not a true reflection of dog bites within the community because they are incomplete.

Furthermore, if a dog breed is documented it is never followed up with a DNA analysis and it is never ascertained that the breed or breed mix documented is accurate.

Cleary states that “The AVMA Task Force (2001) cautioned the readers of their reports that dog bite statistics are not really statistics and do not give an accurate picture of dogs that bite. Also, we do well to remember that dog bites are not some kind of disease, but a societal problem of human behaviour that puts people and other animals at risk”.

A South Australian newspaper called The Advertiser released an article on August 23, 2012 titled “Yet Another Dog Attack As Vets Join Community Push For Mandatory Dog Training” written by D. Jean and M. Milne. (Jean, Milne, 2012)

The article uses a Google image of what is perceived as a viciousdog, that does not relate to the story, nor does the dog reside inSouth Australia. This imagery is sensational and provides no aptitude to inform and educate the community to assist with areduction of dog bites.

The article discusses an attack, which later describes the sustained injury as a superficial laceration. A Council woman had said they had seized three Staffordshire Terrier cross dogs, and there was no evidence provided to specify if the dogs were this breed mix or if they were family dogs or residence dogs.

The National Canine Research council defines a family dog as “ dogs whose owners keep them in or near the home and also integrate them into the family unit, so that the dogs learn appropriate behaviour through interaction with humans on a regular basis in positive and humane ways.”

The National Canine Research Council defines a resident dog as “dogs, whether confined within a dwelling or otherwise, whose owners maintain them in ways that isolate them from regular, positive human interactions. The isolation and lack of exposure to the family unit results in the display of behaviours different from Family dogs.” (NCRC)

The article states “The survey was in response to a number of serious attacks in the past month including:” . German Shepherd Cross. Pit Bull. Mastiff Cross. Australian Bulldog

The article does not indicate whether these breeds were the total sum of breeds in the research or why they only chose to uses these four breeds. Nor do the authors give reference to where the statistics were generated. A further attack was mentioned. The dog was labelled as a 'Pit Bull', even though the breed does not exist.

Cleary describes that this type of journalism, with the use of inaccurate and incomplete data, lack of reference and use of breed guessing, as supporting and assisting to create poor Government policies like BDL and influences societal discriminations.

Cleary explains that in the United States, the popularity of 'pit bull' type dogs with people who want a good companion as a family pet is growing. The attitudes towards 'pit bull' type dogs and what constitutes responsible pet ownership are shifting. This is reflected in positive changes to the laws in Ohio, Florida and Massachusetts.

Page 3 www.pawproject.com.au

More about how media can influence a negative approach to specific breeds and how these breeds have fallen victim to discriminatory legislation and a poor public portrayal, please read The Pit Bull Placebo authored by Karen Delise. (Delise, 2007)

The Pit Bull Placebo is free to download atwww.nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com, under the tab 'Publications'.

Guessing a breed or breed mix of a dog from an unknown origin is a standard practise in sheltering and rescue organisations, even though research has found that there is little correlation between breed guesses and DNA analysis. Moreover, inaccurate breed labelling retards adoptions and hinders return to owner for lost pets.

Dr. Victoria Voith from the Western University of Health Sciences states that there are large disparities between visual identification and DNA analysis and justification of current public policies pertaining to breed specific regulations should be reviewed. (Voith, 2009)

Janis Bradley, Associate Director of Communications and Publications at the National Canine Research Council is the author of “The Relevance ofBreed In Selecting A Companion Dog”. Bradley explains that cross breedsoften do not resemble either of their parents, and further generationsreveal a diversity among the offspring. (Bradley, 2011)

This is based on a study by Scott and Fuller in 1965 that studied genetics and dog behaviour. (Scott, Fuller, 1965)

Image A is a mated pair – Basenji male and Cocker female.

Image B is a female and male hybrid.

Image C is the F2 litter.

Image A Image B

The images reveal the difficulty in guessing the breed or breed mix of a dog. In a shelter, image C dogs would most likely be labelled as Labrador mixes.

Bradley states “We cannot attribute predominant breed identification to any dog based on appearance, no matter how striking the resemblance”. (Bradley, 2011)

Images taken from Scott, JP, JL, Genetics and the Social Behaviour of the Dog. (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago press, 1965)

Image C

Page 4 www.pawproject.com.au

It is recommended from research that shelters and rescue organisations do not breed label dogs from an unknown origin. People are doing dogs in general a disservice if they continue to assume breeds and breed mixes of dogs, including their pets. Disputing the efficacy of breed discriminatory legislation remains difficult when the general public, media and organisations that are selling animals for adoption are inaccurately breed labelling dogs.

A breed identification study was conducted in four different shelters in the United States. It concluded that DNA analysis failed to confirm pit bull type breeds in more than half the dogs identified as 'pit bulls' by shelter staff. This means that in a State that kills these types of dogs, these shelters would be killing dogs that were not in fact 'pit bulls'. The study showed that one in five dogs genetically identified as 'pit bulls' were missed by shelter staff and there was a lack of breed identification consistency amongst staff. (Olsen, Levy, Norby, 2012)

It is recommended that shelters and rescue organisations market their dogs for adoption based on the dogs needs and attributes rather than an inaccurate breed label. This enables a better person-dog match, which results in increased successful adoptions and decreases the resurrender rate. Also, breed labelling, whether accurate or not, brings breed specific behaviour expectations of the dog. This leads to mismatched adoptions and hinders potentially matched persons even viewing the dog.

If a member of the public visits a shelter or a website to purchase a dog for a pet, which type of marketing do you think would reflect the needs and attributes of the dog and accurately portray them as their profile for a life companion?

Image taken by Arica Dorff Image taken from Google Images

Could a person know if Hooch could suit their lifestyle, family requirements and work commitments? It makes sense to advertise information that will enable people to find their match and even look at shelter pets that they would not have otherwise considered, based on breed generalisations and bias.

Amy Marder, V.M.D. And Director of the Center for Shelter Dogs, Animal Rescue League of Boston, states that “There is so much behavioural variability within each breed, and even more within breed mixes, that we cannot reliably predict a dog's behaviour based on breed alone. Each dog is an individual.” (Marder)

Boom the dog from Working Terriers

Cleary closes the seminar with, “If you are going to project your moral obligation to help animals, you have a moral obligation to be correct.”

Page 5 www.pawproject.com.au

References

Australian Veterinary Associationhttp://www.ava.com.au/policy/615-breed-specifc-legislation

Berkey, J “Dog Breed Specific Legislation: the cost to people, pets and veterinarians, and the damage to the human-canine bond” July 2009 http://www.animalfarmfoundation.org/files/5A._Berkey_AVMA_2009.pdf

Bradley, J “The Relevance of Breed In Selecting a Companion Dog”. National Canine Research Council, LLC, USA, 2011

Delise, K (2007) “The Pit Bull Placebo: The Media, Myths and Politics of Canine Aggression” Anubis Publishing, Ramsey, New Jersey

Griggs, B personal communication, September, 2012

Jean D, Milnes M “Yet Another Dog Attack as Vets Join Community Push For mandatory Dog Training” The Advertiser, August 23, 2012http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/national/mercy-over-dog-attack/story-fndo1z0b-1226454760822

Marder, A “Breed Labeling Dogs of Unknown Origin” Viewpointhttp://www.nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/uploaded_files/tinymce/Marder%20viewpoint.pdf

National Canine Research Council “Resident Dog vs Family Dog - What is the difference?”http://www.nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/uploaded_files/tinymce/NEW%20Resident%20v%20Family_revised%20Jan%202013.pdf

Olson, K., Levy, J., Norby, B. (2012) “Pit Bull Identification in Animal Shelters”[poster] Maddie's Shelter Medicine Program, University of Florida, USA , Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, Michigan State University, USA http://www.maddiesfund.org/Resource_Library/Incorrect_Breed_Identification.html

Scott, JP, Fuller, JL Genetics and the Social behaviour of the Dog. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1965

The Royal Society of Prevention of Cruelty To Animalshttp://kb.rspca.org.au/What-is-the-RSPCAs-position-on-breed-specific-legislation_497.html

Voith, V “A Comparison of Visual and DNA Identification of Breeds of Dogs”. Proceeding of Annual AVMA Convention, Seattle, WA, July 14, 2009 “Betty Crocker was rescued from a cruelty case in Georgia, where her former owner was accused of dog fighting. Betty now lives in her dream home, with a ten year old girl as her best friend and another AFF Alumnus, Captain Crunch, as her sidekick. Last, summer, her family drove an RV down the east coast to Disney World, bringing Betty along for every minute and truly proving that dogs are family.” This poster and more found at www.animalfarmfoundation.org

Page 6 www.pawproject.com.au