Some interesting data on pit bull intake & adoptions in shelters

Last week, Dr. Emily Weiss wrote a really interesting blog about pit bull adoptions and shelters.

Before I go into the details of the post, I will note that Dr. Weiss has been doing a great job of writing for ASPCA Pro over the last several months including a lot of data-driven information and I would recommend putting the ASPCA Pro blog in your "must read" list if it's not already. 

But last week, Dr. Weiss wrote an article entitle "Filling up the Pit" -- talking about pit bulls, which according to most shelters are the dogs that are most likely to be "at risk" in their shelter.

In the article, she pulls data from 30 shelters (she does not say which shelters, or even what region the shelters are in).  

Based on the data she collected, Pit bulls were the 3rd most popular breed of dog adopted from these 30 shelters (Chihauhuas were #1, Labrador Retrievers #2). In total, 11,376 pit bulls were adopted from these 30 shelters, which is nearly 7,000 more than German Shepherd/Shepherd mixes which were #4 on the list. 

This isn't really surprising. All three of these breeds are extremely popular and as such, are very common in shelters. It would make sense that more would be adopted from shelters because that is what is most commonly available. It's not like shelters are overflowing with Wheaton Terriers. 

What I do think is interesting is that it factually debunks a common mantra about pit bulls in shelters in that they are somehow unwanted or not desireable. It's simply not true. We've known that pit bulls are one of the most popular types of dog throughout the United States, now we also have the data to show people want to adopt them from shelters also.

She then pulls the information for intake of those shelters. I this case, it turns out that pit bulls are also the most popular dog to come into the shelter with nearly 53,000 intakes.. The combination of being #1 in intake (by a large margin), and #3 in adoptions, pit bulls ended up unfortunately being the most commonly euthanized breed/type by a very large margin. In total 25,142 pit bulls were euthanized, compared to 7,837 Labrador Retreivers. 

 

 Based on Dr. Weiss's research on reasons people surrender their pets to the shelter, she hypothesizes that we don't necessarily have a pit bull adoption problem (I agree, to a point) but that we have a pit bull intake problem -- much of which is being driven by the difficulty in finding housing for pit bull-like dogs. 

I know from our shelter experience, housing issues are a leading driver in why owners surrender their pets. Sometimes it's due to size, breed requirements for renters, but also by a person's own insurance company denying coverage. 

This becomes even more problematic in many areas of the country where breed-specific legislation further causes pit bulls to enter shelters in spite of having owners who care about them and want to keep them.

But the problem doesn't just stop with the high intake of pit bulls at shelters. The same housing/insurance/breed ban issues that cause pit bulls to come into shelters at a greater clip than other types of dogs also impact a shelter's ability to adopt them back out on the back side -- as many potential adopters will not be able to adopt a pit bull for the same reason the dogs ended up in the shelter in the first place.

In that way, I also believe that we also have a major pit bull adoption problem as well. Then tack on some shelter-specific policies that may preclude pit bulls from adoption, or a false belief by a shelter that adopters aren't looking for them (which often results in really bad profile descriptions).

It's a complex circle to be sure, but one that is infinitely solveable if we focus on what the data tells us, which is this:

1) Pit bulls are very popular dogs. People want them. People will adopt them. We should treat them accordingly.

2) Pit bulls enter shelters at a higher rate than other dogs. Obviously pet retention programs are a must, but what breed specific things cause pit bulls to enter shelters at a higher rate? 

Just raw numbers would be one factor - -the high number of pit bulls in general would be why there are so many in shelters (the same is also true for Labs & Chihuahuas). Restrictive housing  & insurance policies, laws targeting breeds, etc would also be a factor. 

This would call for eliminating breed bans and other breed specific policies. It would call for the blanket removal of breed-specific landlord policies, insurance requirements and home owners association rules.

And it would call for elimination of breed-specific adoption policies that make pit bulls harder to adopt and artificially prevent pit bulls from finding homes when they inevitably do make it to the shelter.

So in many ways, we still have a pit bull adoption issue as well. Because as long as there are more coming in, than going out safely,  there is the need for us to come up with innovative solutions to finding more of them homes. Many shelters are doing this already, but many are not which is helping contribute to the problem.

It's all inherently manageable, but it takes focusing on the data to help drive our decision-making practices. 

Love to get your thoughts. 

 

 

 

Comments

[Cheryl Huerta]

I'm often wary of statistics. As we pit bull advocates already are well aware it is the CDC's decades old statistics on "dog bites/fatalities by breed" that is the basis for so much fear and hatred of pit bulls. Those statistics are also the basis of many of the pit bull bans that exist today...even though the CDC itself has declared publicly that those statistics should never be used for the purpose of legislation.

You yourself has shown how the city's of Denver and Aurora in CO both lay claim to their bans being highly successful and cite statistics to back that up. So I guess what I'm saying is that although numbers don't lie how we use the numbers can lie a blue streak; and a harmful one at that if you look at the whole pit bull ban deal.

What do I think? I think that most organizations/people will use statistics to get what they want. They aren't exactly 'lying' but they are twisting the data enough to make a case for or against something/someone. So it would by quite understandable and possible that shelters who want to move those pit bull type dogs through at a higher rate, because they have more of them in their shelter, might twist the data just a bit so that they can say that there are too many pit bulls and not enough homes for them...even more so than most other kinds of dogs.

The reasons you cite why there are more pit bulls than other kinds of dogs in shelters are valid ones and are ones that my advocacy has diligently been working on rectifying for the past three years. An end to breed bans and also an end to propaganda about pit bulls would be most helpful in keeping pit bulls out of shelters that already are in loving homes. The renters/home owners insurance policy issue where some insurance providers discriminate in their policies is another that might go away if bans and the misinformation about pit bulls were to go away.

I do have to interject however that not every dog owner is suitable to have a pit bull. Only people who have the strength of character and who dedicate themselves to being proper/responsible dog owners should have pit bulls. Pit bulls are tenacious (a good thing), are easily excited (they can go from 1 to 10 plus in a heartbeat given the right situation) and are very strong physically. I'd be curious how many pit bulls are surrendered to shelters or returned after having been adopted due to behavioral issues with the owners not having the where-with-all to handle a strong kind of dog like pit bulls and other strong breeds are.

While I'm still unsure which statistics to 'believe' I have a feeling it's a lot more middle of the road than many might think and I believe that to turn things around for pit bulls the animal welfare community (that includes shelters, rescues and advocacy's) needs to do a much better job at everything. There are many people out there in large and smaller organizations that do a great job of educating the public about pit bulls however obviously there is much more to be done and personally I think the best way from here on out would be for people to join together more because there is strength in numbers so the best way we can help the situation is to work together as one voice singing the same song so that those who need to be educated will listen.

It's not hard to see why more people don't 'get it' about pit bulls and dog breeds. One advocacy/rescue says they are just cuddly, little bunny-like, sweeties that have just gotten a bad reputation and another advocacy/rescue makes it sound as if pit bulls are the canine version of a lion or tiger that should NEVER under any circumstances be allowed in a home with other dogs, with cats or even children. To be sure the truth and facts about these dogs lies somewhere in the middle but unless we speak the same language together no one will ever know the truth that really needs to hear it.

I agree wholeheartedly that it is all inherently manageable but it takes focus; not just on the data and the decision-making practices but also on educating the public better.

[Emily]

the essential challenge of all these kinds of studies is that "pit bull" means so little these days. While it of course is true that "dogs called pit bulls" are subject to all the problems you describe, it's pretty crazy to have "breed specific" policies for a class of dogs that fit a generic description but are not actually a particular breed. There are no breed characteristics for mixed breed dogs. So while traditionally APBT advocates HAVE said "pit bulls aren't for everyone", they meant APBTs (like many purebred dogs) aren't for everyone. The generic blocky headed short haired dog called a "pit bull" can just as well be adopted to generic adopters as any other generic shelter dog

[Sally]

Emily Weiss is no scientist. I don't believe many of her conclusions. She won't release the data for independent review. If she wants to be taken seriously (and not just an ASPSA cheerleader), she needs to publish in peer reviewed journals.

[Brent]

Emily -- I think that's a fair distinction. And yes, in the sheltering world, there are a lot of dogs are called "pit bulls" even though they are not (there are a whole host of reasons for this: breed ID issues, and some need to protect adopters from unwittingly subjecting themselves to breed discrimination).

So yes, when you start including short haired, block-headed dogs as "pit bulls", not only do they wildly outnumber anything purebred, but also their behavior traits become extremely varied. And this doesn't even take into account behavior traits that vary dramatically even within purebreds.

[Brent]

Sally,

Emily Weiss does not publish her data in scientific journals...and I do wish that she would make the shelters used in this study known (for example, one shelter with breed-specific policies would create a pretty major swing in results).

However, I will say most of her findings mirror other research out there and the experiences of most shelters I'm familiar with and should not, IMO, be summarily dismissed. If you have issues, I'd love to have you contribute to a real dialogue.

[Matt B]

I think it's important to realize that, even if we say there isn't an adoption problem, pit bull-type dogs are being euthanized at about a rate of 50%, much higher than any other dog on that list (the next closest is about 33%).

[Brent]

I agree with you Matt. I do believe that we have an adoption problem. also. Some of the adoption problems are for the same reason as the intake problems, but still, if they are finding their way to the shelter, shelters need to find positive outcomes for them.

[kmk]

The first step toward solving this problem (at the risk of sounding ridiculous) is keeping the dogs in their homes in the first place. Attitudes ARE changing. The first step is local ordinances need to change. Owners need to be more aware of breed-neutral insurance companies. There needs to be more information available about pet-friendly rental property. When I was a kid you just didn't get a pet until you owned your own place but I get the idea times have changed, and I realize in some areas of the country that's not an option due to housing prices.

If we could just keep the dogs that are already in good homes in those homes it would be a big step in the right direction.

[EmilyS]

From what I read, the 2 biggest reasons now that people turn their dogs in are 1) housing (as KimMK describes) and 2) behavior.

Many/most of the owners would keep their dogs if they could solve these.

Both are really solvable.

And also too: if shelters and local policies would stop obsessing about s/n and stop seizing dogs that aren't, that would keep a lot of dogs out of shelters..

[Brent]

Agreed.