My Photo


follow us in feedly

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Best Of KC Dog Blog

Become a Fan

« October Draws for Paws! | Main | Luv-a-bully march a huge success »

October 27, 2007



Lots of good stuff this week.

The story about the dog poisoning didn't go into details about the case. And while I don't have any specifics on this particular case, I will say the majority of these kinds of incidents involve people who leave their dogs unsupervised in their yards (or, more specifically, where there have been past complaints about barking), or there are aggressive dogs living at the residence. (But...most's because of barking.)

I could give dozens, if not hundreds, of case examples of dogs poisoned after numerous barking complaints went unaddressed by local officials and/or the dogs' owners. In fact, it is so routine, most of us in the field typically presume there were unresolved barking issues, when a dog turns up intentionally poisoned.

Brent, you may also want to look into the dog attack case coming out of Scarborough (a suburb of Toronto).

Note: the Toronto Star (useless rag, if ya' ask me) apparently doesn't know that to command a dog to attack is "sic", as in, "She sicced the dog on him."

As today's media report goes, a child involved in an altercation, after playing with other children, went home to retrieve his dog (a German Shepherd/Irish Wolfhound mix). He brought the dog back to the scene of the fight, and sicced it on the other children. The dog bit a girl on the thigh, but released when commanded by the boy. (And people wonder why we always talk about "the ADULT owner/guardian" of the dog...) (Presumably, since no one could sic any of my dogs on anyone, when you have parents who model this kind of training/behaviour for their children, you get kids who think of dogs as weapons.)

No surprise to anyone, the dog reportedly has a history of biting. (Gee...what have I been saying for years??? That every dog involved in an unprovoked attack I've investigated over eight years of dog bite research has a history of aggressive behaviour?!? That applies, even when it is the dog's first successful bite, and when the owners "claim" the dog has no history of aggression. It always turns out the dog was clearly aggressive, in the past. An unprovoked bite is never the first sign of aggression in dogs. It's the last.)

I should point out, in the event readers aren't aware, Scarborough is in Ontario, where a province-wide ban on 'pit bulls' has been in place since 2005. The ban was purportedly implemented to reduce the number and severity of dog attacks in Ontario. However, 'pit bulls' have never been responsible for the most dog-related bites, attacks, or fatalities in Ontario. In fact, I'm unaware of a single, unprovoked, dog-related, human fatality officially attributed to a 'pit bull' in Candadian history.

So, biting incidents, like this one, continue to occur unabated by any 'pit bull' ban. Since it is rare for 'pit bulls' to be responsible for more than 10% of bites in a region, that invariably leaves at least 90% (or more) of biting dogs completely unaffected by a ban on 'pit bulls'.

Cases like this only prove the absurdity of breed bans.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)