Friday, 29 May 2015

Climbing Out of the Pit BLOG | - | Dr. Emily Weiss

What’s been happening with pit-types and Chihuahuas in shelters over the past year? Dr. Emily Weiss shares the ASPCA’s latest data.
About a year ago we took a look at the data in our shelter stats database (CARDS – Comprehensive Animal Risk Database System) regarding dogs commonly labeled as “pit-type” dogs in shelters, and found some really interesting stuff. You can take a peek at what we found here.
I thought it might be time to take another peek – but this time look to see if there may be change over time from a data set of the full calendar year 2013 vs. 2014. As dogs who have the basic physical appearance of a pit-type dog continue to gain in popularity, what do we see reflected in the shelter data? We wanted to know…
First – a bit about the data set. There are 45 shelters represented – most of which we are partnering or working intensively with in a way that requires individual animal data collection. 24 are municipal facilities, and the rest are nonprofit shelters. This sample is just that – a sample, not necessarily a national representation. However, it does include data from all four United States quadrants.
We focused on the top five breeds for each of the indicators – Intake, Return to Owner, Adoption and Euthanasia. I want to point out that we fully recognize that the breed-mix identification is a wishy washy affair – but that this is how the dogs were represented in the system. Many of these dogs were likely mixes, and the data set was pulled by “primary breed.” Under the category of “pit-type,” we included the breeds commonly put in a pit bull-type bucket – American Staffordshire, American Pit Bull Terrier, Staffordshire Terrier, pit bull, etc. It is likely that some of the general “terrier” category also includes some pit-type dogs, but we kept that category separate as terrier, since the variety is wide depending upon shelter location. 
So, starting with good news… There were fewer pit-type dogs entering these shelters in 2014 compared to 2013 – and in fact, intake was down for all of the top 5 breeds. 
And how about some knock-it-out-of-the-park news? Pit-type dogs were adopted more than almost all other categories (other than Chihuahuas)! Yes – the second most popular dog adopted in this sample were pit-type dogs. This is an increase over 2013, when they ranked number 3. Their adoption rate also increased! The myth that no one wants a pit-type dog is simply that. Plenty want them – they are growing quickly in percentages of the dog types seen in veterinary clinics, and registrations of purebreeds are climbing, in addition to more adoptions.
When it comes to intake and euthanasia, it is still the pits for those bully breeds – ranking number one for both categories. However, both intake and euthanasia were down compared to 2013.  In fact, euthanasia of pit types dipped below 50%. While there is still a long way to go, risk is decreasing.
Chewing on the Chihuahua data, we see a bit of a different trend in outcomes. While Chihuahuas are ranked number two for intake, they have a 48% adoption rate and much lower euthanasia rate of 15%. There are obvious differences between Chis and pit-type dogs – size being one obvious one. But less obvious, Chihuahuas are very prevalent in some parts of the country and more rare in other parts of the country, while pit-type dogs seem to be well represented in shelters in almost all parts of the country. Both size and prevalence impact transport and relocation options when there are simply too many to choose from in one location. Relocating an under-represented breed can result in quick live releases for those pups (where they may have languished or been euthanized if they remained at the shelter where there were just too many), but there are not many locations that do not already have a good number of pit-type dogs of their own.
Of course we know it is not just size and national representation in shelters that impact pit-type dogs. Breed-specific legislation and housing restrictions play a very strong role, and one we continue to work to eliminate. Another strong driver that is under your control are the restrictions animal welfare organizations put on the adoption of dogs in the bully category.  Landlord checks, home inspections, mandatory family introductions, mandatory age restrictions, mandatory dog-to-dog introductions…  are all not uncommon requirements for those wanting to adopt a pit-type dog. While the individual dog, no matter what his breed mix, may need special support, most just need to get the heck home. 
With plenty wanting them, and many sources for puppies and dogs within most communities, what about adoption in the locations where the highest intake is coming from?  You may saturate the area with vaccinated, spayed or neutered dogs and open the door to safety net programs to help both save the dogs in the shelter and decrease the intact population in homes.
Things are sure trending in the right direction. Let’s take this one all the way and get – and keep – these puppies home where they belong!

CONTINUE 
READING......http://aspcapro.org/blog/2015/05/27/climbing-out-pit

You Might Also Like

Saving LivesResearch & Data

Thursday, 28 May 2015

Is BSL Effective?


Extensive studies of the effectiveness of BSL in reducing the number of persons harmed by dog attacks were done in Spain and Great Britain. Both studies concluded that their “dangerous animals acts,” which included pit bull bans, had no effect at all on stopping dog attacks. The Spanish study further found that the breeds most responsible for bites—both before and after the breed bans—were those breeds not covered by it, primarily German Shepherds and mixed breeds.
One of the few known instances in which a breed ban’s effectiveness was examined and reported on in the United States occurred in Prince George’s County, Maryland, where a task force was formed in 2003 to look at the effectiveness of its pit bull ban. The task force concluded that the public’s safety had not improved as a result of the ban, despite the fact that the county had spent more than $250,000 per year to round up and destroy banned dogs. Finding that other, non–breed–specific laws already on the books covered vicious animal, nuisance, leash, and other public health and safety concerns, the task force recommended repealing the ban.
In a different study looking at dog bite data, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Humane Society of the United States, and the American Veterinary Medical Association together produced a report titled “Breeds of Dogs Involved in Fatal Human Attacks in the US between 1979 and 1998,” which appeared in the September 15, 2000, issue of the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association. Among its findings, the study reported that during this 20–year period, more than 25 breeds of dogs were involved in 238 human fatalities. Pit bull–type dogs caused 66 of the fatalities, which averages out to just over three fatal attacks per year, and Rottweilers were cited as causing 39 of the fatalities. The rest were caused by other purebreds and mixed breeds. At the time the report was released, Dr. Gail C. Golab, one of the study’s co–authors, was quoted as saying, “[s]ince 1975, dogs belonging to more than 30 breeds—including Dachshunds, Golden Retrievers, Labrador Retrievers, and a Yorkshire Terrier—have been responsible for fatal attacks on people.”
The authors noted that the data in the report cannot be used to infer any breed–specific risk for dog bite fatalities, such as for pit bull–type dogs or Rottweilers, because to obtain such risk information it would be necessary to know the total numbers of each breed currently residing in the United States, and that information is unavailable.
A 2008 report on media bias by the National Canine Research Council (available on their website at http://nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/dog-bites/dog-bites-and-the-media/audience-interest) compared the type of media coverage given for dog attacks that occurred during a four–day period in August 2007 with intriguing results:
  • On day one, a Labrador mix attacked an elderly man, sending him to the hospital. News stories of his attack appeared in one article in the local paper.
  • On day two, a mixed–breed dog fatally injured a child. The local paper ran two stories.
  • On day three, a mixed–breed dog attacked a child, sending him to the hospital. One article ran in the local paper.
  • On day four, two pit bulls that broke off their chains attacked a woman trying to protect her small dog. She was hospitalized. Her dog was uninjured. This attack was reported in more than 230 articles in national and international newspapers and on the major cable news networks.

    It is not a stretch to see how such news coverage could influence calls for breed bans from the frightened public and its legislators.
  • http://www.americanbar.org/newsletter/publications/gp_solo_magazine_home/gp_solo_magazine_index/pitbull.html

Dog Breed Identification: What kind of dog is that?


What kind of dog do you have? Our dog breed identification study may help uncover your dog's identity!
“Mom always said I have my father’s ears.”
While many people like to know “What kind of dog is that?” just to satisfy their curiosity, dog breed designations have also been used in an attempt to predict future behavior, match pets to families, find lost dogs, and even to restrict the ownership of certain types of dogs.
Dogs come in all shapes and sizes, and frequently without pedigrees to describe their heritage. The breeds of dogs with unknown or mixed-breed lineages are frequently guessed based on their physical appearance, but it is not known how accurate these visual breed assessments are.
We conducted a national survey of dog experts to compare their best guesses for the breeds of dogs in a series of photographs. These visual assessments were compared to DNA breed profiles for the dogs.
More than 5,000 dog experts, including breeders, trainers, groomers, veterinarians, shelter staff, rescuers, and others completed the survey. You are invited to view pictures of the 100 dogs in our study, their actual DNA breed results, and what our survey responders guessed their breeds were.

See the results >>

Read the study abstract


This study is being conducted by Dr. Julie Levy with the assistance of Merial Veterinary Scholar Kathleen Croy and is made possible by a grant from the National Canine Research Council.

You can help us save more homeless cats and dogs through groundbreaking research and crucial training for students and shelter veterinarians. Please donate today!

Difficulty of Breed Identification

BSL requires all dogs to be categorized by breed. But breed identification is not as easy—or as objective—as you think.

Do you know what a “pit bull” looks like? Take a quick break and see if you can find the American Pit Bull Terrier. Better yet, see if you can identify ALL of the dogs’ breeds before you click for the answer.
Can you spot a “pit bull” mix? Look at these photos and then check the bottom of the page for matching DNA results.
Can you spot a “Lab mix”? Look at these photos and then check the bottom of the page for matching DNA results.
Okay, so maybe you’re not a breed identification expert. But, surely people who handle a lot of dogs are better at identifying dogs’ breeds? Not according to the following studies about animal shelter breed labeling:
Comparison of Adoption Agency Breed Identification and DNA Breed Identification of Dogs (2010)
Incorrect breed identification costs dogs their lives (2012)

BREED IDENTIFICATION AND PUREBRED/MIXED BREED DOGS

Breed-specific legislation, by definition, restricts dogs based on their breed. This requires breed identification of each and every dog.
Breed identification might be easy when a dog is purebred, has a pedigree, and is registered with a kennel club. However, this makes up only a very small fraction of all dogs in the U.S. In 2006, an estimated 72 million dogs lived in households in the U.S. (U.S. Pet Ownership & Demographics Sourcebook (2007 Edition)) How many of these dogs are purebred, pedigreed, and registered? Though I have seen one estimate put the number at 25 percent, I believe that to be extremely high. The actual number of purebred, pedigreed, registered dogs is difficult, if not impossible, to estimate.
Even using this highest estimate, that leaves 75 percent or more of the U.S. canine population without any sort of traceable lineage. Some of these dogs are undoubtably purebred, though they may lack any sort of historical paper trail to prove it. Their appearance is close enough to a breed standard that owners can confidently say that their dog is of a specific breed.
The vast majority of canines, however, are mixed breed dogs. And though we tend to think of mixed breed dogs as the offspring of two purebred dogs (Mastiff x Boxer = Mastiff-Boxer mix), the reality is far more complex. Most mixed breed dogs are a genetic mishmash resulting from several generations of mixed breed dogs interbreeding. The end result is incredibly complex.
To make things more confusing, a dog that doesn’t really meet any single breed standard may be categorized as a type of dog rather than a specific breed. Dogs may be identified as terriers, pit bulls, shepherds, or retrievers; none of these are actual breed names, and the breeds that really do make up these categories come in a startling variety of shapes, sizes, and colors. There’s a huge difference between an Airedale Terrier and a Jack Russell Terrier, so what does a “terrier mix” describe?

BREED IDENTIFICATION FOR BSL IS BASED ON A DOG’S APPEARANCE ALONE.

The primary means of breed identification for non-pedigreed dogs and mixed-breed dogs is a visual glance and a guess. The dog may be compared with the breed standard for a breed; again, this is based on visual assessment. It is entirelysubjective.
Ontario Attorney General Michael Bryant, who pushed for a ban on pit bulls in Ontario, proposed this manner of identification:
“I’ve said before and I will say again, if it walks like a pit bull, if it barks and bites like a pit bull, wags its tail like a pit bull, it’s a pit bull.” (Ontario Hansard 38-1, November 4, 2004)
Dog warden Tom Skeldon, the driving force behind Ohio’s BSL, testified before the court in Tellings v. Toledo (2006) that
“even if a dog was 50 per cent pit bull, if it did not ‘look like a pit bull,’ the owner would not be charged. On the other hand, if a dog did ‘look like a pit bull,’ it would be classified as a pit bull and the owner would be subject to the ‘vicious dog’ laws.”

WHO IDENTIFIES BREEDS FOR BSL?

To know whether BSL affects any particular dog, breed determination is usually made by an animal control officer or a veterinarian (depending on how the law is written). However, contrary to popular assumption, veterinarians and animal control officers—despite handling many dogs for a living—are not trained in breed identification. For the most part, they are no better than average citizens at breed identification.
Animal Control Officers (ACOs) and Workers There are not many hiring requirements to get a job as an animal control officer or shelter worker (the major requirement is having a physical ability to do the work, which may include picking up or restraining large animals). Being able to accurately and certainly identify dog breeds is decidedly not a requirement. Because AC departments are usually understaffed and underfunded, any sort of official training is minimal (most officers learn their duties on the job), and breed identification training is a complete rarity. Additionally, ACOs do not generally learn breed identification on the job to any great degree, because they rarely, if ever, receive feedback regarding their breed designations—so they have no idea if they are labeling dogs correctly or incorrectly.
Veterinarians Veterinarians do not have to be trained in breed identification to receive a veterinary license—and most aren’t. In fact, most veterinarians don’t even receive training in dog behavior. Their focus is on treating disease, and they don’t need to know a dog’s breed to diagnose and treat disease.

CHECKLISTS FOR BREED IDENTIFICATION

Some places with BSL use checklists for breed identification in an attempt to standardize and objectify identification processes. Some checklists are very short, while others tick off dozens of characteristics in great detail. The person performing the identification may be asked to choose along a sliding scale whether a particular dog matches or does not match a particular characteristic on the checklist.
Unfortunately, these checklists consist almost entirely of subjective characteristics. Using descriptive—but unmeasurable and nonscientific—words like “medium length,” “broad,” “high,” and “strong,” the checklists ask their users to draw personal conclusions about whether a particular dog matches each item. Below is a pit bull checklist put out by the city of San Francisco.
San Francisco, CA Pit Bull ChecklistThe City and County of San Francisco, Department of Animal Care and Control considers a dog to be predominantly a pit bull breed (American Staffordshire Terrier, American Pit Bull Terrier, or Staffordshire Bull Terrier) if s/he possesses 5 out of the following 8 characteristics:
  • Head is medium length, with a broad skull and very pronounced cheek muscles, a wide, deep muzzle, a well-defined, moderately deep stop, and strong under jaw. Viewed from the front, the head is shaped like a broad, blunt wedge.
  • Eyes are round to almond shaped, are low in the skull and set far apart.
    [Ed. note: I wonder what type of dog does not have “round to almond shaped” eyes? Are not eyeballs, by their very nature, “round”?]
  • Ears are set high. Un-cropped ears are short and usually held rose or half prick, though some hold them at full prick.
  • Neck is heavy and muscular, attached to strong, muscular shoulders.
  • Body is muscular, with a deep, broad chest, a wide front, deep brisket, well-sprung ribs, and slightly tucked loins.
  • Tail is medium length and set low, thick at the base, tapering to a point.
  • Hindquarters are well muscled, with hocks set low on the legs.
  • Coat is a single coat, smooth, short and close to the skin
Let’s apply this checklist to some dogs.
Dusty
  • Head is medium length, with a broad skull and very pronounced cheek muscles, a wide, deep muzzle, a well-defined, moderately deep stop, and strong under jaw. Viewed from the front, the head is shaped like a broad, blunt wedge.This one works for me except for “moderately deep stop.” Dusty’s stop doesn’t seem too deep.
  • Eyes are round to almond shaped, are low in the skull and set far apart. I think Dusty’s eyes are triangular.
  • Ears are set high. Un-cropped ears are short and usually held rose or half prick, though some hold them at full prick.
  • Neck is heavy and muscular, attached to strong, muscular shoulders.
  • Body is muscular, with a deep, broad chest, a wide front, deep brisket, well-sprung ribs, and slightly tucked loins.
  • Tail is medium length and set low, thick at the base, tapering to a point.
  • Hindquarters are well muscled, with hocks set low on the legs.
  • Coat is a single coat, smooth, short and close to the skin
Dusty gets a 6 out of 8, which makes him a pit bull, according to the checklist.
Do you agree with my evaluation?
 
Luke
  • Head is medium length, with a broad skull and very pronounced cheek muscles, a wide, deep muzzle, a well-defined, moderately deep stop, and strong under jaw. Viewed from the front, the head is shaped like a broad, blunt wedge.
  • Eyes are round to almond shaped, are low in the skull and set far apart.
  • Ears are set high. Un-cropped ears are short and usually held rose or half prick, though some hold them at full prick.
  • Neck is heavy and muscular, attached to strong, muscular shoulders.
  • Body is muscular, with a deep, broad chest, a wide front, deep brisket, well-sprung ribs, and slightly tucked loins.
  • Tail is medium length and set low, thick at the base, tapering to a point.
  • Hindquarters are well muscled, with hocks set low on the legs.
  • Coat is a single coat, smooth, short and close to the skin.Luke’s fur is obviously too thick to be a single coat. It is smooth and short, though.
Luke gets a 7 out of 8, which makes him a pit bull, according to the checklist.
Do you agree with my evaluation?

DNA-BASED BREED IDENTIFICATION TESTS

The DNA-based breed identification tests currently on the market are not yet accurate enough for widespread use; they only recognize around 100 of the 400 to 800 dog breeds out there. Further, these tests are neither cheap nor quick.
When it comes to most mixed breed dogs (most pet dogs) the results that come back usually confirm that these mixed breed dogs are heavily mixed and contain only small traces of certain breed markers. Unfortunately, these results may serve to “taint” a dog when it comes to BSL; a dog with only a minute amount of “American Staffordshire Terrier” detected in its genes—perhaps only one of its great-great-great-great grandparents was a purebred AmStaff—is nevertheless considered a “pit bull mix” and is therefore subject to BSL.
It smacks of the “one-drop rule” of Jim Crow laws.
An interesting related article: Mutts Decoded in the Boston Globe, August 2, 2008
According to the article:
“The results of the [DNA] testing have been so startling that the Animal Rescue League is planning to stop making educated guesses about mixes and will instead label all mutts as American shelter dogs. The shelter the Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals runs at Angell Memorial Hospital is considering a similar change, although the MSPCA prefers the term New England mutt.”
Here are some breed-id DNA test results for my dog, Dozer. Judge for yourself how accurate they are.
Test #1 “Distant traces of” American Staffordshire Terrier, Bull Terrier, Bulldog (trace amount at low confidence), Dalmatian (trace amount at low confidence). “There are also faint signals from other breeds which are not strong enough to identify.”
Test #2 Bulldog (between 20-36%), Parson Russell Terrier (between 20-36%), Rottweiler (between 20-36%), Poodle (between 10-19%), Boston Terrier (less than 10%)
We call Dozer a “pit bull mix” because that’s what the pound called him when we adopted him as a tiny puppy—but in fact he’s not one, not two, not even three, but a crazy jumble of breed types… making him a good ol’ American mutt, really.
Yet, society is never satisfied with the label “mutt.” BSL does not allow dogs to be called mutts. They must be given a primary breed designation, even if such a designation does not match reality.

MISIDENTIFICATION IN THE MEDIA

When it comes to dog attacks, the media has never had a good track record of accuracy, particularly when it comes to identification of the breed of dog involved. Many journalists, whether in their haste to meet deadlines or because they simply don’t care, do not make the effort to correctly and carefully identify the breed of the dog involved in the attack.
Of course, one has to ask—how does anyone really know what breed the dog is in the first place?
Did the journalist ask the victim? We have seen here how difficult it is to identify a dog by breed. Victims are certainly not dog breed experts. And in some cases, it is that very ignorance about dogs that makes the person a victim in the first place.
Did the journalist ask the dog owner? Dog owners often have no better idea what their dog’s breed is. Unless they purchased a purebred dog, complete with authentic pedigree and kennel club registration, a dog owner’s statement of his/her dog’s breed is probably going to be based on the identification made by the person or place where they got the dog. This may be a backyard breeder, a flea market, a neighbor, a friend, or an animal shelter. Do any of these providers really know what breed the dog is?
Did the journalist ask animal control? As mentioned above, animal control officers and animal shelter workers are not breed identification experts, nor are they required to be. ACOs are going to give their best guess, or they will go with whatever the dog owner says the dog’s breed is.
Does it really matter what breed the dog is?Actually, no. Dog attacks follow a fairly predictable pattern involving a handful of factors such as reproductive status of the dog, function of the dog, containment method used, and so on. Reporting the dog’s breed (or supposed breed) serves no real purpose except for description (and the connotations and stereotypes that follow). It does not educate readers how to avoid a similar event.
But misidentification has serious ramifications. Dog attacks that make headlines can stir up public animosity toward a particular breed or type of dog. This animosity can lead—where else?—to calls for BSL against certain types of dogs.

BREED IDENTIFICATION IS TOUGH—AND IT DOESN’T MAKE US SAFER

If you own a dog, you probably already know that most people can’t identify dog breeds; it is a universal dog owner experience to be asked “What kind of dog is that?” by a friendly passerby.
The popularity of breed-identification DNA tests, despite their questionable accuracy, further indicates that even dog owners don’t really know what their dogs’ breed makeup is.
Even assuming we could definitively identify every single dog’s breed or mix precisely, where do we go from there?
A dangerous dog isn’t dangerous because of the shape of its eyes or the breadth of its chest; a dangerous dog is dangerous because of the way it behaves.
DNA-based breed id tests suggest physical features and possible temperament traits, but they definitely don’t tell you what an individual dog’s behavior is going to be like. As any animal or human behaviorist, psychologist, biologist, or anthropologist will tell you, a living creature’s behavior is the result of a combination of genetics and environment.
So even if we do establish, definitively, that a dog has a “pit bull” for a distant ancestor, how does that make us safer? Does it really make sense to spend our energy worrying about a single drop of blood?

SOURCES AND RESOURCES