Dog Bite Fatalities Plummet 33%

[RealPitBull]

Dog Bite Fatalities Plummet 33%

Dog bite fatalities were lower in 2008 than in 2007. Over the decades, the
annual number of dog bite fatalities remains within a stable numerical
range. These incidents, which are extremely rare, are, to a significant
statistical degree, a product of dog owner neglect and/or abuse

Slanesville, WV (PRWEB) January 8, 2009 -- Despite the increase in the human
population of the United States to more than 300 million, and the canine
population to almost 74 million, human fatalities attributed to domestic
dogs fell by one-third in 2008, over the number reported the year before,
Karen Delise, Director of Research for the National Canine Research Council,
announced today.

"The fantastically rare incident of a dog killing a human being was even
rarer in 2008 than it was the year before," Delise said.
The fantastically rare incident of a dog killing a human being was even
rarer in 2008 than it was the year before

Because there are so few incidents, relative to the human and canine
populations

a rise or drop in the number of cases exerts a misleading effect on the
percentages.

Based upon my research, the number of these incidents is not trending one
way or the other, Delise said.

The Pit Bull Placebo: The Media, Myths and Politics of Canine Aggression

The Council has identified 23 canine-caused fatalities for 2008, as compared
with 34 the prior year. Officials investigating the 2008 incidents claim to
have identified 10 different breeds or types of dogs in connection with
these 23 fatalities, though experts caution that breed attributions are
usually made on the basis of physical impression, and should not be
considered reliable.

Delise points out that, while annual tallies fluctuate dramatically in
percentage terms, the raw numbers have remained within well-defined limits.
"Because there are so few incidents, relative to the human and canine
populations, " Delise notes, "a rise or drop in the number of cases exerts a
misleading effect on the percentages. "

For example, there were more incidents in 1990, 25, than there were in 2008.
In 1998, there were 10. In 1999, there were 27. In 2000, there were 19.
Delise, who, over the past 20 years, has investigated fatal attacks
extending back into the 19th century, does not consider these fluctuations
significant.

"Based upon my research, the number of these incidents is not trending one
way or the other, Delise said."

Further, Delise points out that the fluctuations in both the annual total of
incidents and in the breed identifications of the dogs implicated, pale
before the constant factor that emerges from these incidents: the failure of
owners to humanely care for and control their dogs.

In the overwhelming majority of the cases Delise has studied, cases
extending as far back as the 1960's, the dogs involved were not family dogs,
that is, dogs that lived in the home with the family. Rather, they were
maintained outside the home, in pens, yards, or on chains, and/or were
obtained for the negative functions of protection, fighting or guarding.
Many resident dogs are also victims, to varying degrees, of human neglect or
abuse.

The Council will publish its final 2008 report later in the year, following
further investigation into the circumstances of last year's fatalities.
Civil and/or criminal proceedings against irresponsible owners, are pending
in a number of cases.

About Karen Delise/The National Canine Research Council
Karen Delise is the Founder and Director of Research for the National Canine
Research Council and the author of "The Pit Bull Placebo: The Media, Myths
and Politics of Canine Aggression". (Anubis Publishing) She can be reached
at kdelise @ ncrcouncil.com.
The National Canine Research Council publishes well-documented, reliable
research to improve the lives of dogs and the communities in which they
live.

On the web at: www.nationalcaniner esearchcouncil. com

www.prweb. com/releases/ 2009/01/prweb183 1554.htm

[valliesong]

Studies of local statistics of dogs bites for the city of Reading, PA, showed reproductive status as being the top factor. Intact males accounted for the largest portion of bites. Basement dogs are very common in the city, however, and they receive as little care and socialization as yard dogs, so that may have skewed the statistics a bit.

I must say that personal experience has made me wary of both intact males and any kind of unsocialized dog. If you mix the two together, yikes! I'm not sure if it's the hormones of the dogs or the hormones of the people who often own them.

[RealPitBull]

Intact males have topped many lists I've seen, as well. Another common theme I've found is dogs with aggression/bite histories are usually part of these attack stories in the media.

[bamapitbullmom]

Yep, I agree with Mary when she says lots of the dogs who bite already have a notch on their...er collars.

That most attacks and bites are by unaltered males is something, too but I think that if you look at how many of those unaltered males were chained, the numbers are fairly even.

I guess it goes hand in hand, anyone who chains their dogs are less likely to neuter them and vice versa.

If they would really look deeply at the whole picture specifically *why* tethering increases the propensity of a dog injuring someone maybe they'd get it. And by "they" I mean the general public.

I know reasons behind dog attacks has been covered and continues to be, but these anti-pit bull folks aren't out there reading both sides of the story. They aren't thumbing through Delise's books or all the others which really get to the core of it.

I have an unaltered male pit bull in my house right now and have had him here for a month. (He's a foster and getting neutered next Tuesday but had to finish up his Prednisone first so don't yell at me)

He's never been tethered, well-socialized, raised indoors and well taken care of ('cept the fact his owner was a moron and did allow him to roam). Now, had he had a history of being chained...I would assume he would be a very different temperament with few social skills. I likely would not have fostered him. Not with another male pitty, a female pitty and young kids.

I think it has more to do with chaining and the effects rather than simply being unaltered. Combined, it is a very bad recipe.

[RealPitBull]

I, too, think it's a combo and that balls alone aren't what're going to make or break a dog. I've had more than my fair share of un-neutered males.

[valliesong]

I think that hormones can increase aggression in at least some dogs, but bites are usually the combination of several factors. And the people least likely to S/N are also the ones most likely to chain/pen, not socialize, not train, etc. It's hard to separate out all the factors when they so often occur in the same dogs.