Home            OH Law           Pending Bills             Rep Directory      Contact Us

 About Us            BSL         Proposed Local BSL          Calendar            Join CAO

The Truth About Breed-Specific Legislation

Is breed-specific legislation effective?

There is no evidence that BSL makes communities safer for human families or their companion animals.  In fact, there are many studies that conclude BSL is ineffective, costly to taxpayers and, actually, hampers community safety efforts.

In particular,

On June 9, 2008, the public was informed that the Dutch government plans to lift a 25-year ban on "pit bulls" because the ban did not lead to a decrease in dog bites.

To read the entire article, click here.

In 2003, the Vicious Animal Legislation Task Force (the "Task Force") was formed to study the effectiveness of the Prince George’s County, Maryland pit bull ban.  The Task Force estimated that the County spends more than a quarter-million dollars each year to enforce the ban.  Further, in a report to the County Council, the Task Force noted that “public safety is not improved as a result of [the ban]” and that “there is no transgression committed by owner or animal that is not covered by another, non-breed specific portion of the Animal Control Code (i.e., vicious animal, nuisance animal, leash laws).” The Task Force recommended that Prince George’s County repeal the ban.  To highlight a few problems with BSL:

•    According to a Prince George's County Animal Management Division administrator, 80% of the hundreds of pit bulls seized and killed by animal control every year are “nice, family dogs.”  Indeed, 70% of the 3,000 annual calls to Animal Control regarding pit bulls involve nothing more than the report of a pit bull on a neighbor’s property.  These reported dogs are not engaged in dangerous behavior and are generally just hanging out in their own backyards.  But the ban makes them illegal, even where no injury or threat of injury has occurred, and requires that most of them be destroyed.

•   The Task Force concluded that Prince George’s breed-specific ordinance  is extremely costly while providing little attendant financial or public safety benefit to the county.  Specifically, during the two year period of 2001-02, Prince George's County collected only $35,000 in dog registration fees but spent, at minimum, $560,000 to enforce the ban due to inevitable agency overlap and the length of time seized dogs must be held (not including  overtime and utility costs or lost revenues due to the "dramatic reduction in dog shows/exhibitions.") 
  
  Also, there is no clear connection between the Prince George's ban and the marginally fewer bites per year by dogs identified -- or possibly misidentified -- as pit bulls.  In fact, according to the Task Force, the number of dog bites “has declined steadily – across the board,  in a variety of identified breeds and types of dogs – by 9% since 1996.”  [http://www.understand-a bull.com/BSL/Research/PGCMD/PGCP10.htm; RodneyTaylor, Associate Director, Prince George’s Animal Management Division.]

•   The pit bull ordinance has placed a tremendous burden on the Prince George's County shelter, which has limited space and yet must hold all pit bulls during the pendency of legal proceedings that can take as long as 8 months.  As a result, the shelter has had to euthanize hundreds of other adoptable dogs for lack of space and has suffered decreased adoption rates because there are so few available dogs.  [http://www.understand-a-bull.com/BSL/Research/PGCMD/PGCP24.htm.]

•   The Task Force also noted that as a result of the county pit bull ordinance, "Animal Management Division human resources [are] stretched thin...thus reducing their ability to respond to other violations of the [Animal Control] Code."  [http://www.understand-a-bull.com/BSL/Research/PGCMD/PGCP24.htm.]

            Click here to read the entire report.

In December 2007, a study entitled "Spanish Dangerous Animal Act:  Effect on the Epidemiology of Dog Bites" (the "Spanish Study") was published.  The Spanish Study compared dog bites reported to the health department of Aragon, Spain for 5 years before and 5 years after the implementation of the Dangerous Animals Act.  The authors of the Spanish Study concluded that:

            (a)     there was no change in the number of reported dog bites after the implementation of the BSL;

            (b)     the breeds most responsible for bites both before and after the implementation of the BSL were
                       those unregulated by the legislation.  Specifically, German Shepherds and mixed breeds were most
                       responsible for bites during the two time periods studied; and

            (c)     the restricted breeds, which included the American Staffordshire Terrier, the American Pit Bull
                      Terrier and the Rottweiler, were responsible for less than 4% of the reported bites both before and
                      after the BSL took effect.

             Click here to read the Spanish Study.

In the early 1990s, researchers compared the incidence of dog bites seen in one emergency room for three months immediately prior to the implementation of the Dangerous Dogs Law and then again in the same hospital for the same time period two years after the legislation was implemented.   In 1996, the findings were published in "Does the Dangerous Dogs Act Protect Against Animal Attacks:  A Prospective Study of Mammalian Bites in the Accident and Emergency Department Injury" (the "Scottish Study").  The researchers found:

       (a)     overall dog bite rates did not decline and, in fact were unchanged;

            (b)     the breeds most responsible for bites before and after the implementation of the BSL were the
                       same, Alsatians and Mongrels; and

            (c)     Bites from the restricted breeds - pit bulls, Rottweilers and Doberman Pinchers - were very low but
                      actually increased from 6 to 11 after the implementation of the legislation.

            Click here to read the Scottish Study.

On July 5, 2000 the government of Lower Saxony, Germany ruled that 14 breeds of dogs were especially dangerous and placed restrictions on the ownership, management and breeding of dogs of these breeds. The breeds cited included Bull Terriers, American Staffordshire Terriers, Pit bull Terriers, Staffordshire Bull Terriers, Rottweilers and Dobermans. Exemption required the passing of a standardized temperament test by both dog and owner, administered by veterinary behaviorists at the University of Veterinary Medicine in Hannover, Germany. A passing score required that the dog displayed no exceptional aggressive behavior in inappropriate situations. 

• A STUDY conducted by Esther Schalke, PhD, DVM, which contributed to the REPEAL OF LOWER SAXONY, GERMANY'S BREED-SPECIFIC LAW concluded: 

           *    Dogs of the targeted breeds are statistically no more likely to show inappropriate aggressive behavior    
                 toward humans or dogs than are Golden Retrievers.

           *    Dogs of the targeted breeds signal their intent just like other dogs.

           *    "There was no significant difference between Golden Retrievers and the targeted breeds in the
                 occurrence of exceptional aggressive behavior in inappropriate situations."

            Click here to read the results of this study.

In 2006, Dr. Scot E. Dowd Ph.D. of the Matrix Canine Research Institute conducted a study, the results of which are published in "Assessment of Canine Temperament in Relation to Breed Groups."  In the Abstract of the study, Dr. Down indicated that Breed specific legislation are laws that discriminate against dogs of specific breeds and breed groups, and BSL, similar to human racial profiling, is based upon the premise that certain breed types are more dangerous to humans because of genetic temperament predispositions. The American Pit Bull Terrier and the American Staffordshire Terrier are the breeds most targeted by BSL.  Dr. Dowd evaluated over 25,000 dogs, of various breeds, including 1136 dogs from the pit bull group and 469 American Pit Bull Terriers.  Using results of a rigorous pass-fail temperament test, designed to evaluate characteristics such as human aggression, these analyses statistically evaluated the proportion of dogs categorized by breed groups (e.g., sporting, pit bull, hound, toy, terrier) passing. The results of the study are as follows:

            *      The pit bull group had a significantly higher passing proportion (p < 0.05) than all other pure breed
                    groups, except the Sporting and Terrier groups. These groups, however, did not have a statistically
                    higher passing proportion (p = 0.78) than the pit bull group.

            *      This study has provided data to indicate the classification of dog breed groups with respect to their
                     inherent temperament, as part of BSL, may lack scientific credibility. Breed stereotyping, like racial
                     profiling, ignores the complex environmental factors that contribute to canine temperament and
                     behavior.

             Click here to read the entire study.
 

In their study of human fatalities resulting from dog bites, the United States Centers for Disease Control (the "CDC") did not support the breed-specific approach. They cited, among other problems, the inaccuracy of dog bite data and the difficulty in identifying dog breeds (especially true of mixed breeds). They also noted the likelihood that as certain breeds are regulated, those who exploit dogs by making them aggressive will merely turn to other, unregulated breeds.  Significantly, the CDC also noted how many other factors beyond breed
may affect a dog’s tendency toward aggression – things such as heredity, sex, early experience, reproductive status and socialization and training.

These last two concerns seem well-founded given that more than 70 percent of all dog bite cases involve  unsterilized male dogs, and that an unneutered male dog is 2.6 times more likely to bite than a neutered dog.
In addition, a chained or tethered dog is 2.8 times more likely to bite than a dog that is not chained or tethered. Further, 97 percent of dogs involved in fatal dog attacks in 2006 were not sterilized; 78 percent were maintained not as a pet but rather for guarding, image enhancement, fighting or breeding; and 84 percent were maintained by reckless owners — abused or neglected, not humanely controlled or contained, or allowed to interact with children unsupervised. 

[THIS PAGE IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION AND NOT COMPLETE.]
[PLEASE CHECK BACK SOON FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.]