My Photo


follow us in feedly

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Best Of KC Dog Blog

Become a Fan

« Thoughts (& practical solutions) to the idea of reducing & eliminating holding periods at shelters | Main | The link between ignorance and irrational fear »

December 09, 2013


Dog hero

has anyone ever dis proven the national canine research council
even if not can you direct me to some sources.



I know most of the folks over at the NCRC. Karen Delise does most of their work on these issues and I've generally found Karen to be one of the most well-researched people I know in this regard -- and generally started writing about this topic without an agenda and over time became an advocate because the data led her that way (like many of us). When it comes to fatal dog attack research, no one is more detailed and has covered it longer than Karen.


It would be very difficult to dis prove the NCRC and specifically this report. Report published by the JAVMA has been peer reviewed prior to publication. Which is the respected practice for all studies and reports inn the scientific community. The manor in which the information was gathered is well beyond even what the CDC has ever done. The blog noted above "the truth about Pit Bulls" is maintained by Merritt Clifton. He did his own study years ago on Dog bite related fatalities. His study was based off of news reports which are highly suspect when it comes to breed identification, was not peer reviewed and so has no scientific merit. This new JAVMA study completely discredits his study.

Dog hero

Thanks for the info i guess some people will go very far to reach the same foolish goal.
I guess merrit is like one of bsl advocates idols like colleen or alan beck. one even said that bsl was effective.


This "paper" is a puff piece for the Animal Farm Foundation. Just look at the co-authors (Delise, Marder, etc. all pit bull apologists for the AFF).

You have to realize the slight of hand here. They are deliberately trying to skew the breed identification toward unknown or using the Wisdom Panel (which is not accurate and can not be used to identify pure bred dogs, nor should it even be used to identify mixes) to obfuscate breed identifications.

They claim that 80% of the dogs in the study could not be identified by their magic method. Well gosh, if the media reports were overwhelmingly pit bull type dogs and then you wipe out 80% of the dogs that you were unable to get PEDIGREE PAPERS for a decade after the fact, then of course you can spin that to say that breed is not a factor.

Let's look at what their identification criteria were:

"in cases without documented pedigree, parentage, or DNA information but where photographs of the dog or dogs involved were available, a veterinary behaviorist (ARM), who was unaware of the breed descriptor used in the media or animal control reports, attempted to determine whether the dog could reasonably be described as a recognized purebred dog but did not attempt to guess at possible breed mixes. Concordance with the media report was assigned on the basis of the expanded definition."

So, unless they were DOCUMENTED PUREBREDS WITH A PEDIGREE (ahem, good luck trying to get this information from people at all, let alone years after the fact "hello Mrs. Smith, sorry your daughter is dead, can we get the pedigree papers of your dog that killed her"), or DNA (yeah, not going to happen with all those dogs that were put down without even being able to offer a DNA sample, plus the fact that there is not even a single DNA test on the market that can identify breeds accurately, they rely on photographs.

Photographs sent to Amy Marder at the AFF. A pit bull apologist who puts out charts like the "you can't identify a pit bull by looks!" and then just take her word for it what the dogs are. Notice they don't publish the photos so the rest of us can see what they are calling what.

So this study doesn't advance the "can we associate genetics/breed to dog bite deaths" argument at all. They just muddy the waters by trying to make as many of the dogs as possible "unknown."



I'm not surprised, but you missed the point of the piece. I didn't even bother to mention the DNA stuff because it's irrelevant to the article. The major point here is that in 22% of the cases the media had multiple different breed reports and in 35% of the incidents, authorities disagreed with media reports. This was far worse when you included bites where multiple dogs were involved.

When facts matter, making a breed determination is far more difficult. Unlike those (like you) who want to assign "pit bull" to everything to try to validate yourself.



I don't care what you think of me. But the evidence is clear. This is a propaganda piece done by the AFF.

Their methodology is specifically designed to avoid labeling ANY dog as a pit bull.

If you took any time to actually READ the methodology this would be clear to you.


I read it. But meanwhile, in your focus of trying to focus almost entirely on breed and try to find fault in the study, you've apparently missed the wealth of other social, husbandry and parenting practices that combine to create the bulk of the situations.

Experts have been saying for DECADES that behavior is a complex creation of multiple factors, including environment, containment, etc. The clear note here is the importance of multiple socialization factors. But where breed haters have failed, for decades (and why BSL has failed, for decades) is that it ignores these major factors in influencing behavior and focuses on one factor that is not a primary driver.

This has been the near consensus of trainers, veterinarians and other experts for years. It's great that government is finally listening.

Dog hero

hey how did they calculate the staistics


They had a very detailed worksheet of the different factors and had multiple different people code the worksheet according to the reports. It was a really detailed process that is explained at length in the paper. The methodology is actually really solid. BW is a hater and is just upset that it doesn't match his point of view.


Landauer, the evidence is clear. YOU couldn't identify a purebred APBT with papers.. in fact you don't even believe such a thing exists.

The evidence is clear: MOST people can't identify a purebred "APBT".

Without an identification as a purebred APBT or AST, what IS a "pit bull"?. A pit bull is a pit bull because YOU (or some newspaper writer thinks it is)? Do you think YOU could identify a purebred border collie by one photograph... every time?

Anyone who reads your own blog knows you're a fancier of the "landrace" thing so you're just blowing smoke here.

What exactly is YOUR agenda in disavowing the research that demonstrates that there are common underlying factors behind dog bites and that the name people give the dog is NOT ONE OF THEM?

Don't even pretend that you're an innocent bystander


Oh Emily. Don't you know, that peer-reviewed papers published by the JAVMA are biased...but the reports by specific individuals based on data they will not share based on media reports they can no longer produce are unbiased, true sources.


^ Ha.

Dog hero

are you talking about me or border wars emily.
Because if you are talking about me.the truth is i support pitbulls but i want the most accurate and effective information possible. i have just need to do that in order to make sure no bsl advocates can disprove it.


She was talking about Border Wars. You're in the clear Hero.


I can't help but wonder if the use of certain breeds as "resident dogs" does not just create a self fulfilling prophecy so to speak. In other words if there are certain breeds that are seen as good "resident"(guard dogs, etc.)and put in arguable unnatural social circumstances then I guess it is not all that surprising that those breeds might top the list of perceived problem animals.


Randy, it definitely seems as if that would be the case.

Dog hero

well according to one bsl advocate

well just check this out. and tell me what you think brent


I guess it only takes a quick glance of the video to show a hole host of things gone wrong here: dog on a 4 foot long tow chain,clearly a resident dog, low income neighborhood (where other social issues exist). Anyone who looks at this and thinks the breed of dog is the problem is an idiot.

Dog hero

yeah well thats just how things are i just wish some more pitbull advocates would step up.
Then again her site after you post enough "pro pitbull nonsense" she blocks you. but hey how can you lose when you take most of an opposing teams players off the game.

Dog hero

Brent about your 2007 obvious questions post. recently learned they don't care. they see no issue with. i asked one specifically attacks and they turned it into dog bites. Like they were trying to change the subject.

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.)