Late Thursday night, 4 year old Jayelin Graham was fatally attacked by a Cane Corso that lived in his family's apartment in Brooklyn. The boy's mother and the four kids, aged 10 months, 2, 4 and 5 were returning home from a shopping trip and the mother apparently went back to get the keys out of the stroller she had left behind -- leaving the younger kids alone with the dog. When the mother returned, the dog was on top of the 4 year old and fatally bit the child in the neck.
The attacking dog, along with another dog (described sometimes as a German Shepherd mix, sometimes as a Husky mix) was removed form the home.
The dog was apparently owned by the boy's mother's boyfriend, Damian Jones. According to the NY Daily News, Jones has a bit of a rap sheet -- including busts for weapons possession, kidnapping, endangering the welfare of a child and reckless endangerment. Neighbors have also said that they were afraid of the dog and that Jones actively trained the dogs to be aggressive.
The story initially broke as a story about 'pit bull' that attacked the young boy -- but was later changed once authorities got to evaluate the dog. Of course, the media picked up the story and ran it as a 'pit bull' story at first -- but then replaced 'pit bull' with "dog" in the changed headlines. It's always interesting to see how the media treats different types of dogs differently in headlines. Pit Bullentin Legal News has a screen grab of an early headline -- but you can see them all in google cache's too.
Regardless of the type of dog, it obviously isn't about that. The fault clearly comes when a dog is actually trained to be aggressive and then is left alone with small children. In spite of attempts by some to make this about the type of dog, the real focus should be on the human-created circumstances that led up to the attack.
My heart goes out to the family in this tragic incident. The story was picked up by over 300 media outlets.
A couple of weeks ago, Cleveland Councilman Matt Zone -- who has spent the past year working with advocates,city council staff and the city's Animal Warden John Baird to rewrite the dangerous dog law -- introduced the new ordinance that would remove breed-specific measures in from Cleveland's law.
The City Council's Public Safety commitee will be hearing the bill on Wednesday, June 1, at 10 AM at the Cleveland City Hall -- 601 Lakeside Ave, Room 217. If you live in or around the Cleveland area, please show up to support the proposed ordinance as a strong turnout of support will really send a strong message to the committee.
So please make plans now to take time off work to show up for the meeting.
Also, HB 14 is still on the table in the Ohio House -- which would remove the state breed-specific laws....and we're hopeful that this can move forward in June as well.
As the economy continues to put many cities in financial risk, more and more of them are realizing the high expense and negative return on their breed-specific laws and looking for more sound legislation that will improve public safety and be fair to dog owners. Welcome Cleveland to the growing list of cities that are beginning to realize that BSL is not a viable solution.
Marketing/Entrepreneurship/Business maven Seth Godin has another great blog posting today entitled "Looking for the Right Excuse".
In the post, Godin talks about a common problem among people to seek excuses for why things didn't work out -- and often the list of reasons excuses is started even before the particular project has started. Godin, of course, has an alternative:
Here's an alternative to the excuse-driven life: What happens if you relentlessly avoid looking for excuses at all?
Instead of seeking excuses, the successful project is filled with people who are obsessed with avoiding excuses. If you relentlessly work to avoid opportunities to use your ability to blame, you may never actually need to blame anyone.
I can't help but think this is part of what has made many involved in the No Kill movement so successful. It has become really easy to create excuses as to why we fail at saving the lives of healthy and treatable dogs and cats. The public is irresponsible. We don't have enough volunteers. There are too many animals and not enough homes. Our shelter is inadequate. We don't have enough money.
No doubt nearly every shelter in the country struggles with all of these things.
But what happens if we change our obsession with the excuses to making the obsession about not needing them?
What if we create more reasons for people to adopt? What if we create more opportunities for people to volunteer? What if we are more creative in our fundraising and adoption events?
In talking with Bonnie Brown, and Nathan Winograd, and many folks from Austin, and Suzanne Kogut, and Mitch Schneider -- there is little doubt in my mind that a big part of their success has been deciding not to focus on excuses -- but to become obsessed with no longer needing the excuses.
Looking for excuses is in some ways very human....but success will come when we cast that aside and decide not to make excuses any more.
Over the past couple of days, many Kansas City area groups have deployed teams to help with disaster relief in Joplin, MO -- a city that suffered devastating destruction Sunday late afternoon.
The disaster has left many families grieving for loved ones, many displaced, and many homeless.
As more and more people see pets as part of their family -- they too can provide a lot of comfort in a very trying time for these families -- and many of these four legged friends are also missing.
I'm very excited that there is so much support for those in need from so many in Kansas City to help those in Joplin who badly need it right now (and are also facing potentially more, powerful storms today and tonight).
There is also a special Facebook page set up for people to post pictures of lost and found animals. I'm sure there are other sites out there too -- so please post them in the comments if you are aware of them.
Also, many of these organizations are now short-staffed at home -- and also taking in large numbers of animals from the KCMO shelter which still is not doing adoptions for the 3rd consecutive week. So if you are unable to travel, and still want to help, I'm sure any of these organizations would be thrilled to have volunteer support this week.
Photo Credit: Kansas City Star -- which has an amazing and heartwrenching photo gallary from Joplin.
S&S has long been known to be a problem commercial breeder in the state -- and according to HSUS reports, had more than 500 pages of enforcement issues that showed them in violation of Missouri state laws regulating commercial breeders - -ranking the operation as one of HSUS's "Dirty Dozen". You can read some of the horrible inspection reports here -- thanks to KMOV-TV in St. Louis.
And yet, because the USDA functions as a compliance organization, not really a law enforcement one, the breeding operation remained open and licensed by the state because local authorities who would have been responsible for shutting down the operation were not doing so.
The shutting down of S&S Family Puppies comes a mere 3 weeks after the passing of SB/HB 161. SB/HB 161 (otherwise known as the governor's compromise bill) replace voter approved Proposition B -- and while it removed several key factors in the Proposition B, it also replaced it with several key enforcement provisions. One of those provisions happened to be giving the state Attorney General the power to close down commercial breeders who repeatedly didn't meet state criteria.
However, it was the very enforcement provision included in the bills proposed by the legislature that allowed for S&S to be closed down so quickly -- as it was the state Attorney General Chris Koster that ordered the operation to be shut down. This is a power that was not included in the voter-approved Proposition B that was a key component in the legislature in dealing with the issue of repeat offenders (a major problem that was identified by the Better Business Bureau).
The dogs will be put up for auction again as opposed to turned over to various rescue organizations. This is sort of how governments handle confiscated items (like tow services) -- but it would be nice if the state could come up with a better solution to living creatures that are confiscated for horrible situations. But I do think this is a great first start -- as the new law, which went into effect immediately, worked perfectly to shut down one of the state's worst offenders of animal cruelty. There are more operations that they need to set their sites on -- but I think showing the success of the new law -- in just 3 weeks -- at shutting down poorly run operations, is worth noting.
Slowly but surely, the momentum to end the killing in our public and private shelters is growing. Communities across the country are embracing initiatives that are dramatically limiting, or totally ending, the killing of healthy, non-aggressive shelter pets.
There is little doubt in my mind that 20 years from now we will look back at this point in time with embarrassment over having waited so long to make the changes necessary to cure a very fixable problem.
When we look back 20 years from now, how will people see you?
Will they see you as someone who was at the forefront of progressive shelter changes that helped end the killing?
Or will they see you as a person who defended the status quo and was barrier to the necessary shelter changes.
Will you be seen as one of the people who strived to move things forward for animals?
Or as a dinosaur to a dying breed of shelter workers who defending the killing of shelter animals because you believed it was the only way?
Twenty years from now, when we all live in a society where all healthy and treatable animals are saved, how will people perceive your actions?
It's not too late to start changing how history will perceive you.
It's been years since I've seen this "statistic" -- but apparently it's been making a resurfacing of late....and a google search shows a cool 2.8 million references to the "statistic". I can't completely trace the origination of the source of the number -- but it seems to be yet another one of those urban legends of shelter that continues to exist in shelters.
The statistic, which you've likely heard before, is that "1 in 600 pit bulls finds a home".
If you are one of the people who has parrotted this popular phrase -- please stop.
Now, let me say, I don't know what the real number is --- I doubt anyone really does. But I know 1 in 600 is not the right number. Some simple math makes this comment seem so outrageous that it doesn't even come close to passing the sniff test.
So let's talk a bit about the numbers -- and why this number cannot even be remotely close to true. Keep in mind that all numbers are estimates -- because no "real" number exists. But I've tried to provide a fair representation of the numbers.
For this "1 in 600 pit bulls finds a home" statement to be true, then the assumptive correlary is also true -- that 599 out of every 600 pit bulls is eventually killed by a shelter somewhere.
In this country, it is generally agreed upon that somewhere between 4 -4.5 million animals are killed in shelters every year. The majority of these are cats -- leaving roughly 2 million dogs killed in shelters each year.
Of those 2 million, based on the percentages from a lot of the data from urban shelters around the country, about 40% or so of the dogs killed in the shelters are "pit bull" type dogs. This number could be debated -- and can be wildly influenced by how widely you cast the net for the term 'pit bull" --but I think 40% sounds like a somewhat fair number to use. There are some shelters where the number is higher than that -- but a large number that have very few pit bulls in them. But this number gets us to about 800,000 'pit bulls' killed in shelters each year.
If only 1 pit bull finds a home for every 599 that is killed, for the "1 in 600" data point to be true, that would leave only 1,333 pit bulls that are adopted from shelters or rescues (800,000 divided by 600). Given that in the Kansas City metro alone we adopt out more than 150 each year (which is 12% of that number) 1,333 seems REALLY low.
But let's check it a separate way.
Current dog population estimates have the total number of dogs in this country at around 78 million. Most estimates for the number of "pit bull" type dogs is between 5-10 million -- again, depending on how narrow or wide your definition is. Again, based on the percent of dogs in shelters and in ownership, I think splitting the middle here will work, and let's, for the sake of argument, say there are 7.5 million owned pit bulls in this country.
If a 'pit bull' lives on average to be 12 years old -- that would mean that each year, 625,000 (7.5 million divided by 12) pit bulls are aquired by people each year (this number is probably a little higher than that since for a variety of health/accidental reasons dogs (of all breeds) die before the age of their life expectancy).
So, if 625,000 pit bulls are brought into homes each year, but supposedly only 1,333 are adopted from a shelter or rescue, that would mean that only.2% of all pit bulls that go into homes come through adoption.
A fairly recent research study from GfK Roper indicates that 30% of all pets are gotten from shelters or rescues (this is for dogs and cats -- cat numbers tend to be lower because people have a higher tendency to "take in" cats). A similar study from PetSmart Charities indicated that 24% of people got their pet from a shelter or rescue. It seems statistically improbable that 24% of all dogs are adopted from shelters, but only .2% of all 'pit bulls' (a type of dog that makes up roughly 10% of all dogs) are adopted from shelters.
If 24% of all 'pit bulls' were adopted from shelters, that would mean that each year, roughly 150,000 of the 625,000 new 'pit bulls' taken into homes would be adopted from shelters (not 1,333 - which would be the number if the "1 in 600" were true). This would make the number of pit bulls that enters the shelter finding a forever home as closer to 1 in 6 -- not 1 in 600.
Let's try one more way.
If we base our assumption that there are about 7.5 million owned pit bulls in this country - and let's say, for arguments sake, 20% are gotten through adoptions (the national number is probably somewhere between 24% and 30% based on the studies above). That means 1.4 million of the owned pit bulls out here were aquired via adoption. If the 1 in 600 number were to be true, this would mean for each of these adopted pit bulls, there would be 599 that was killed at a shelter. That would mean that over the past decade, there would have been over 838 MILLION pit bulls killed in shelters -- even though the total number of all DOGS killed at shelters is generally agreed to be around 20 million.
Now I realize that most of these numbers are approximations -- but even if you adjust them to a different reasonable number, it is impossible to get anywhere near the "1 in 600" number. Not even close. Unfortunately it seems that many think sharing a "shocking" number will startle people into spaying or neutering, or adopting, or whatever the intended goal is. But I'm a bigger fan of being honest about the problems and trying to address them appropriately. Using an outlandish number like "1 in 600" only makes the dogs seem unwanted -- adding to a stigma that already exists.
Yes, there are still too many 'pit bulls' being killed in shelters. Yes, we need to overcome stigmas that prevent them from being adopted, prevent them from ever making it onto the adoption floor or prevent them from being spayed or neutered. But we need to be honest -- and not use outlandish statements that make the stigma worse, not better.
I wrote a detailed post about this presentation last week, but on Friday, 5/20 from 6-8 PM Central Time, Ryan Clinton is going to doing a webinar with the Reforming Animal Control Presentation.
Cost for the Webinar is $25.
If your city is like most and having major issues with who is running your shelter and/or animal control departments, this presentation is well worth your time and money.
The week will be blessed with a lot of great information about preventing dog bites and attacks. It will also be sparked by a lot of hyperbole and headlines designed to scare people and drive ratings. Be smart and recognized the difference.
With that, there are four key stories that launched last week (or over the weekend) that I think are good starting points for National Dog Bite Prevention Week.
The Number of dog bites to postal workers topped out at about 7,000 dog bites to postal workers in 1983. Now, 30 years later, the number is 2,675. This is a substantial improvement -- and particularly notable as the population of people and the increasing perctage of people who own dogs as pets have driven the number of owned dogs up dramatically during this time. 2,675 is still a lot -- but it is great to see the downward trend.
State Farm is one of the largest home owner and liability insurance companies in the nation -- and also the largest that does not discriminate on insurance coverage based on dog breeds (except in Ohio -- where they do discriminate because of Ohio State law that declares all pit bulls to be "dangerous"). In 2010, State Farm paid out more than $90 million as a result of nearly 3500 dog bite claims. In their official press release, State Farm lists their top 10 states for insurance claims. It is interesting to note that Ohio is #3 on the list in spite of the state-wide Breed-Specific legislation and in spite of State Farm's inability to insure 'pit bulls' there. This is the state that has the highest upward swing when compared to overall population -- again showing that breed specific laws do NOT improve overall public safety -- and arguably make people less safe, not more safe.
I emailed the spokesperson for State Farm to see if they had numbers of bites by dog breeds and she noted that they don't track that information because breed is not a causal factor in bites and because breed identification wasn't reliable in these cases -- something else that has proven to be true over and over again. And you'd bet that a company that has $90 million at stake in this would be making a pretty sound decision.
This report has gotten a lot of media play this week. Mostly, if you look at the list, many of the cities largely fall where they are should based on the size of the populations. Large cities will have more dogs and likely more bite incidents. Here are a couple of notable areas that have significantly higher bite rankings than their populations would indicate they should have:
Columbus, OH - Tied at #2 in bites, #15 in population
Cleveland, OH - #8 in bites, #45 in population
Cincinnati, OH - #19 in bites, #62 in population
Denver, CO -- #12 in bites, #26 in population
Toledo, OH -- #27 in bites, #66 in population
Arguably no cities have done more harm to 'pit bulls' in the name of public safety than this group listed above - -with all of them being miserable failures in terms of public safety. All of the Ohio cities are under the state-wide breed specific legislation, and Denver and Cincinnati have outright bans on the dogs. Breed-specific laws do not improve public safety.
Meanwhile, this report has also spurred the fear-mongering that comes with the media. KSHB in Kansas City (you'll see more from them from me this week) reported that "Kansas City is among top cities for dog attacks on mail carriers". Uh huh. They list Kansas City as ranked #21 (which, the report has the cities numbered oddly and has them listed at 21), but KC actually is tied fore 34th on the list of bites (if you count the number of actual cities) and 37th in total population -- so we're essentially right where we should be for dog bites on postal carriers based on overall population. But fear mongering is more fun.
They propose "Respect Dogs Week" -- which make a lot of sense. They have some great commentary on respecting dogs' limits and recognizing warning signs. Very much worth the read.
Also, for your education, doggone safe has put together a quiz to help you understand dog body language to help you stay safe. Take the quiz. I got 9 out of 10 -- and I think the answer to the one I missed was more geared toward kids than someone who has a lot of experience handling dogs that have fear issues -- so I gave myself a pass on it.
It's been a crazy week with a lot of news. And, I missed last week's roundup. I'm going to hold a few things for next week - -including some updates on St. Louis, Montreal, Ft. Smith, and some National Dog Bite Prevention Week. But this should give you a good smattering of the important stories from the past 2 weeks.
Cities/States and Laws
Madison, SD appears to be looking at a new law that would require all 'pit bull' owners to licent their pets, provide signage warning people about their dog and obtain a $250,000 liability insurance policy. Discussions began following this attack -- and yet another example of potential panic policy-making at work. The issue will be discussed on Monday, 5/16.
Webb City, MO appears to be discussing a potential breed ban in their city.
A new law in Florida will allow dogs seized from dog fighting operations to get a fair evaluation and not just systematically killed regardless of their temperament or behavior.
I absolutely LOVE this story -- but in Nevada, feral cats are getting "life" in prison by putting in the area prisons to help curb rodent problems in the the jails. This is yet another awesome idea for helping feral cats.
A full page ad run by Fix Austin that is calling out the political stances of various candidates for local city government. I'm thrilled to see more and more animal welfare advocates in more and more cities getting involved in this type of politicking.
This story out of Tyler, TX is about a 'pit bull' that KNOCKS DOWN a 5 year old. The child really sustained no injuries. If I had a dollar for every time as a kid a dog knocked me down I'd be a pretty rich man. Should never have been news -- and only was because of the type of dog involved.
Miscellaneous
South Bend, IN newsstation WNDU provides a good overview of how to prevent dog bites.
Celebrity vet, Marty Becker is making an appearance in the Kansas City metro area on Monday, 5/16.
With major flooding in many areas along the Mississippi Rive Basin, many temporary shelters have been set up to help animals, and many rescue groups have been stepping up to help animals impacted by these floods.
A great story about the Liam Perk Foundation. Two years ago, two year old Liam Perk was tragically killed by the family's dog. The family is now dedicating themselves to helping other families understand good, responsible, smart ways to protect their family and pets.
Blog posts worth reading
Luce is officially of sound mind - -Save a Pit Bull Save the World discusses her experience with taking the American Temperament Test Society exam.
The fight for Patrick - Winograd takes a look at the fight to save Patrick in Newark, NJ
Wish you were here - Jennifer Winograd looks at the history of social justice movements and how certain things were presumed to be true -- because that's how they always had been - -in spite of evidence to the contrary. This is a must read link for the week.
No Hope for Hope's Law - Winograd takes a look at CAPA, which failed to pass in Texas this week, and why many supposed humane organizations are still fighting to keep the failing status quo.
Animals in disasters: how Katrina changed their world - Francis Battista at Best Friends has a good post about animals in natural disasters and how the experience of Hurricane Katrina made things better for all of them in light of some major flooding along the Mississippi River this week.
Weekly Dose of Cute -- Social Times has their top internet videos of the week -- which involve a great video for cat adoptions (I Want) and a very good video of little ducklings watching a yo-yo. "I want" is imbedded below:
Do Pet Store Dogs Fill Shelters? -- An Interesting look from Time 4 Dogs. I think there are plenty of reasons to not like the idea of selling dogs through pet stores - -but the idea that these are the dogs filling up our shelters is probably not one of them.
The color of dog fighting -- if you read one link this week, read this one from Donna at Bad Rap. This post takes a look at the visuals used to show dog fighting, addresses why those visuals are wrong, and also talks about what really is the biggest threat to 'pit bulls" (and it's not the actual dog fighting).
Demonizing the American Public -- Are we shooting ourselves in the foot? -- Wisconsin Watchdog addresses why we need foster homes, adopters and volunteers in order to make No Kill Work
Shibu Inu Puppy Cam hits 27 million views -- people LOVE cute animal video. From Social Times. Speaking of the cute videos of the week, check out the sleeping kitten one and the cats playing with the treadmill one at this link.
Recent Comments